Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t James Delingpole – Microsoft founder and entrepreneur Bill Gates has joined the growing ranks of green activists, who think that ordinary people aren’t qualified to choose who should govern them.
According to Gates;
… Those who study energy patterns say we are in a gradual transition from oil and coal to natural gas, a fuel that emits far less carbon but still contributes to global warming. Gates thinks that we can’t accept this outcome, and that our best chance to vault over natural gas to a globally applicable, carbon-free source of energy is to drive innovation “at an unnaturally high pace.”
When I sat down to hear his case a few weeks ago, he didn’t evince much patience for the argument that American politicians couldn’t agree even on whether climate change is real, much less on how to combat it. “If you’re not bringing math skills to the problem,” he said with a sort of amused asperity, “then representative democracy is a problem.” What follows is a condensed transcript of his remarks, lightly edited for clarity. …
Read more: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/11/we-need-an-energy-miracle/407881/
Some other highlights – Bill Gates on Renewable energy;
Well, there’s no fortune to be made. Even if you have a new energy source that costs the same as today’s and emits no CO2, it will be uncertain compared with what’s tried-and-true and already operating at unbelievable scale and has gotten through all the regulatory problems, like “Okay, what do you do with coal ash?” and “How do you guarantee something is safe?” Without a substantial carbon tax, there’s no incentive for innovators or plant buyers to switch. …
On the need for more government;
… Realistically, we may not get more than a doubling in government funding of energy R&D—but I would love to see a tripling, to $18 billion a year from the U.S. government to fund basic research alone. Now, as a percentage of the government budget, that’s not gigantic. But we are at a time when the flexibility—because of health costs and other things, but primarily health costs—of the budget is very, very squeezed. But you could do a few-percent tax on all of energy consumption, or you could use the general revenue. This is not an unachievable amount of money. …
Bill Gates has attracted significant controversy during his career, for example when he accused developers of free software of being communists, when they refused to give Microsoft unfettered rights to exploit their work. Gates has also spent a lot of time in courtrooms defending Microsoft from accusations of sharp business practices, of being a monopoly, of violating anti-trust laws. So to me personally, it is no surprise that Gates’ response to the difficulty of convincing people to accept his point of view on climate change, is to express authoritarian contempt for ordinary people having such freedoms.
Slightly off topic.
Windows 8 was terrible. No-one liked it (save a tiny minority – but some people like auto-asphyxiation).
It should have led to the company going broke. But as Microsoft has such dominance in business software the system was adopted anyway.
This caused misery and lower efficiency for the whole planet. It delayed the global economic recovery.
Clearly, as market forces no longer work on this corporation, and as it monopolises vital infrastructure, it should not be left uncontrolled by the needs of the users.
Therefore Microsoft should be nationalised.
MCourtney
November 4, 2015 at 12:39 am
But as Microsoft has such dominance in business software the system was adopted anyway.”
“Business software” is really a little too “forgiving” IMO. There was no choice from about 1996 IMO. Non-compliance on license issues MILLIONS of $$$$’s if you look at the CBA in Aus, ~50,000 nodes. That’s HUNDREDS of millions…ANNUALLY!
interesting the nyk stock exchange runs?
LINUX
and chinas developed a Linux in chinese form to run all their govt and other pcs on..
to avoid the bugs n hacks, I believe Rusias also doing similar.
inc a new phone that isnt running the present android system.
I trialed Red Hat Linux and StarOffice for ANZ in about 2000. Worked a treat and was real easy to support. ANZ went M$.
The same thinking saved IBM’s butt many times.
As the old saying went, Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM.
I know of no companies that adopted Windows 8. Most major companies have teams that test new software before it is deployed. They work out all the bugs between software prior to rolling it out to the rest of the company. Even then they will often do staged rollouts.
My current company is planning to go to Windows 10 sometime next year, but we are still running XP.
ATheoK: MCourtney is a socialist. He tends to feel that way about most major companies.
MCourtney
What!? Why?
Is this some sort of test to see Microsoft can become even more bureaucratized, larger and less efficient or responsive? Nationalizing Microsoft will sure accomplish that.
Microsoft is the bureaucratized dinosaur nearly unresponsive corporation waiting to be extinguished at the next paradigm.
Now that’s an innovative idea.
Now that emerging nations want some payment back from the first world due to the carbon sins of their first adopters, they could take a leaf from India.
After independence India nationalised the railways.
There was no compensation.
This was done by a simple democratic act of the Indian people.
As a first step India and China could unilaterally set out a concordat that any Multinational
owned goods and services in their countries be vested in the State.
This would be a quick step to a world agreement on the redistribution of assets.
As the organiser of Microsoft believes in carbon induced climate change he could be the first to
secede.
If that is truly a photo of Bill Gates he does not look well.
‘Since brass, nor stone, nor earth, nor boundless sea,
But sad mortality o’ersways their power,
How with this rage shall beauty hold a plea,
Whose action is no stronger than a flower?
O how shall summer’s honey breath hold out
Against the wrackful siege of batt’ring days,
When rocks impregnable are not so stout,
Nor gates of steel so strong but time decays?’
Indira Gandhi had some apt thoughts on the Gates’ moral hazard of monopoly software slowing progress in the third world. A monopoly of science and technology maintained by price.
‘On the one hand the rich look askance at our continuing poverty, on the other they warn us against their own methods. We do not wish to impoverish the environment any further and yet we cannot for a moment forget the grim poverty of large numbers of people.
Are not poverty and need the greatest of polluters?………The environment cannot be improved in conditions of poverty. Nor can poverty be eradicated without the use of science and technology.’
‘Man and His World’
Address to the United nations Conference on Human Environment,Stockholm,14 June 1972
Start by giving every school age child access to reliable base load power, a laptop and free microsoft programming for five years.
Add that to a bank account.
Now that would lift them out of poverty.
“If you’re not bringing math skills to the problem,” he said with a sort of amused asperity, “then representative democracy is a problem.” Per Bill Gates
////
I wonder whether he is aware of the paper recently published by the French Society Of Mathematicians who recently concluded that this is all bunk.
Perhaps they, being specialised in math skills, know something more than Mr Gates.
Here’s the link to the French Société de Calcul Mathématique SA white paper to which you referred:
http://www.scmsa.eu/archives/SCM_Global_Warming_Summary_2015_09.pdf
The Bill has been whinging for decades. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists
I think he suffers from extreme white privilege, white guilt, all the psychotic manifestations that plague limousine liberals, and the realization that his Windoze empire has been replaced with mobile devices that don’t use his junk. He is also sliding into irrelevance because the government has replaced big money with troves of unmonitored tax dollars.
M$ have done what was always going to happen. You pay for a MP3 track now, for $2? Delete it by mistake, get a new player/phone, down load it again, at a price, at $2. Media rent. Content rent. Application rent. Times that by billions! (Cr)Apple iTunes should give you a hint as to what the future holds.
I can go buy a CD today. And I can keep using it. Tomorrow, you will not be able to do that. Every time you play, you pay.
THAT is the business model of the future.
anyone else running old adobe? 9.
if you do you can swap files to word if you have the cd loaded version installed
however..if you run the new adobe..even if you have office installed it insists on taking you to the cloud to translate to word for a FEE.
wtf?
I managed to load old adobe and now to even load old 9 they want registering to load.
this pc and whats in it will be staying as is till it blows up:-)
the entire cloud use pay scam is beyond belief.
same as storing data in the cloud
one good cme and…kiss it all goodbye.
And then to think that the “windows” system is a poor imitation of the much better Unix/Linux X-window system and the fact that it became dominant is purely and simple because of MS’s monopoly, not on merit. A little rich dictator with megalomanic character traits.
And thereby hangs a tale, Ed. Back in the ’80s IBM was developing its GUI for the new PC and Gates was still on Win 3.1 (or lower perhaps). IBM contracted Gates to build its GUI, which was called OS/2. It was miles ahead of anything else out there and performed well, being a true multi-tasker OS. However, for reasons unknown, IBM decided to get out of PCs and sold the OS/2 code back to Gates for $75k (if memory serves). From the ashes of OS/2 was formed Win 95. The rest is history…
IBM wanted ALL rights! It failed them in 1994.
OS/2 was a massive memory sucking hog that included many unfinished and undocumented bits of code. Plus OS/2 was delivered to customers with crude customer programs. OS/2 was designed much like a mainframe TSO system that any interaction with a program required a computer attention key pressed; e.g. enter. Think FocCalc if one has experience with it.
OS/2 had significant power, if the installation machine was up to the task. Multitasking required the newest Pentium processors available. User friendly, it was not. Plus OS/2 offered the wonderful experience for calling OS/2 support and having the tech support guys commiserate about a problem rather than offer a solution. “Well, if you figure it out, let us know.”
Not the Op system for getting normal desktop tasks done on. Fun to play on though, not games; exploring PC – Network links and observations, downloading some of the impressive cool OS/2 simulations, etc… OS/2 did have the capability for bringing the power of a workstation to ordinary computer users. Just a couple more updates might’ve made it usable.
IBM did not sell OS/2 to Microsoft, they continued to sell it for many years after the divorce. The reason they eventually dropped it was low market share. Here is a fairly detailed history: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/27/the_os_wars_os2_25years_old/
How can the system that came first, be the imitator?
They are both operating systems. They were designed for different markets with different needs. I’m very familiar with the cores of both Unix and Windows. They are completely different. The only thing they have in common is that they are both OS’s.
Ha! Perfect synchronicity; as I scrolled down these comments the page froze. Not unusual. Webpage now recovered (Windows 7, IE 11, everything fully updated). Here goes: I suppose that when Gates rented the 440 foot super yacht “Serene” last year for his holidays, he carefully emitted no discretionary C02. How he didn’t do that is anybody’s guess: Serene’s 8 x MTU 4000 engines must be more special than Bill, despite cumulatively consuming 1,454 litres of diesel per hour. And I guess his environmentally friendly Bombardier BD-700 Global Express private jet manages to scrub the CO2 produced from burning 3,789 pounds of fuel an hour in the cruise, in a special, “Carbon Friendly” way we mere mortals can only imagine. The rank hypocrisy is breath-taking. And no, I wont be downgrading to Windows 10 despite the W10 nag icon (thanks Bill, for that “update”) sitting here on my taskbar – stinking like the fungus covered turd it is.
I can solve Bill Gate’s problem
Just hand me $400trillion and then I’ll tell him to just “switch it off then on again”.
Bill has too much time on his hands. Next, he might start a free for all wrestling team
called FauxCatcher and his Momma will pay people to call him ‘coach”
How many failed predictions does is take before the current climate science is exposed as a fake? How much math does that take? Some of the people in charge shouldn’t be. Nobody made bill Gates anymore or any less special than me or the ability to reason. It’s always been that those who wish to gain control do so by some urgent need that only they can accomplish. In this case, it’s a made up need, with dire conquenceous if acted on. Does not improve the standard of living or improve anybody lives except for those who wish to become even richer. I suppose bill isn’t rich enough yet.
If it can’t predict, it isn’t science, Bill. Tell me which prediction has the IPCC been right about? Since 2000, which one? I can tell you NONE. They keep pushing the dates out and the same fear mongering language, may, could, and might. And you should be in charge? That’s why we have a representative government in the first place. I’m right and you’re wrong.
some transition
“in Asia alone this year power companies are building more than 500 coal-fired plants, with at least a thousand more on planning boards”
Reuters
On the bright side things must be going extremely well for the planet- roll on fossil fuels.
‘No poor countries by 2035’: Bill Gates annual letter says …
http://www.independent.co.uk › News › World › World Politics
17 Feb 2014 – Bill Gates has said there will be “almost no poor countries by 2035
Maybe he’s planning to run for President, and wants the backing of Steyer, Buffet, Soros, Rockefellers, Moore, Hewlett and Packard, Tides etc. when he drops his toupee in the ring…
industrial pollution of co2 at 1200 ppm, frightening-
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=inside+greenhouse&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAWoVChMI-6eYu8f2yAIVBloUCh1K8AAB&biw=1015&bih=674#tbm=isch&q=inside+industrial++greenhouse+flowers&imgrc=url2bpZe1HWP_M%3A
Cop21 will be a total failure……
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/11/03/paris-climate-summit-goals-patchwork-confusion/?intcmp=hplnws
Interesting – write it up as a new story, send it to Anthony. http://wattsupwiththat.com/submit-a-story/
Writing is definitely not my forte !! Maybe you can do it for everyone !!
Poor Bill is obviously suffering from a BIOS problem.
Ok, let’s bring math to the table; http://climatenerd.blogspot.no/
See Bill, – you don’t have a clue. You’re just another dishonest, “green” activists who doesn’t your self understand the math, the science and the logic of climate.
Another thing you also prove by your dishonesty, is that you ended up rich, had only to do with luck!
The only surprise in Gate’s comment is that he made it in public. We have a crony-cap system which is also called corporatism or fascism. “Regulatory Capture” is a feature of the system, not a bug.
Those who think they are at the top of the chain want to direct government without the input of the unwashed masses. After all, in a corporatist system the government is the senior partner in the system and the high and mighty seek to control the state and pull the levers of State. This is easier to do if there is only one guy in charge. Witness Italy in the 30s for example.
Gates thinks that if there was a dictatorship he would be listened to. Perhaps, but he could be shot just as easily. He better hope he does not get his wish.
~ Mark
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C8qCjaVicA4/TglvsGJ8J7I/AAAAAAAABOw/ndUsWPSbUQY/s1600/110704_cartoon_024_a15848_p465.gif
Goggle ComBank Patch…have a giggle
My son – the computer whizz – says that he will make my next computer a mac rather than put me into windows 10.
Good choice! Apple has always been way less trouble than Microsoft.
Mac is great for certain applications. Not so great for business applications. Microsoft has the business market, and many small business software programs are written only for MS operating systems. The providers won’t guarantee that their software will work if it is being run on an Apple machine, and they won’t support it either. It’s just too much hassle.
Less trouble, unless you want to do something useful.
Following your logic, there are lots of business systems that will run only on UNIX/Linux. Your argument for using Windows is quite weak. YMMV (your mileage may vary).
For the average home computer user I would almost always suggest Mac as the most troublefree option.
If you need to run certain software you may have to choose your OS accordingly. More and more software is being written for the web, and in particular for mobile devices. In that light, it is less likely that someone will need to run software that requires Windows.
Of the thousands of network nodes which my company installed and serviced over the years, less than two dozen were for Macs and those were all at publishing, or graphics businesses.
That’s the same kind of argument that says that 97% of scientists endorse CAGW.
This thread started with Dizzy Ringo saying that his next computer would be a Mac. That is likely to be the most trouble free option for him and for his son (who I’m guessing will be doing support).
I have one friend who blows my mind with the things he can make Windows do. Having said that, I am dismayed by the number Windows professionals who are clueless about anything that isn’t Windows.
CommieBob says:
“That’s the same kind of argument that says that 97% of scientists endorse CAGW.”
————————-
No, it isn’t- it’s not even close.
The “97% of scientists…” claim was essentially made- up from thin air and was meant to purposely sway the uninformed. What I stated was true and representative of the business world’s choice of computers. My anecdotal experience was not substantially different than what would be found in IT implementations nationwide, or even worldwide. There are many factors involved in this and in the end, the IBM/MS systems won out in the business world.
Your statement isn’t even true in the sense of the appeal to authority logical fallacy of the “97%” claim. One would be hard pressed to ascribe that sort of influence upon decision- making by the hard- nosed business and IT managers whom I’ve encountered over the years. Just as those few Mac installations were the right choice due to their graphics capabilities, so were the business IBMs.
Ps I’ve remembered one Mac install which wasn’t graphics related. The sons of a business founder had been wrangling for years with their father to get a computer, in order to help him in his emeritus position. The old fellow finally relented, but said that it had to be a Mac, because he’d heard they were easier to use. He’d been a WWII fighter pilot and was unquestionably courageous, yet he balked at the idea of learning how to use a computer. We’re all like that, to some extent.
Pss What I related about IBM/MS computers and the business world may no longer be true. I retired some years ago and have no idea what’s up these days and don’t care.
The trouble with your argument is that it has nothing to do with what I said.
The fact that 90% of desktops and laptops run some version of Windows has nothing to do with whether a Mac is a better choice for a particular user.
Anyone who doubts that Macs are more trouble free should google on
example result
Macs really are less of a pain in the anterior. The downside of Mac is that the hardware and software are more expensive.
If someone chooses Mac because it’s easier to use, that isn’t a character fault. That’s a consumer making a reasonable choice. Folks shouldn’t have to waste their time struggling with a crappy user interface. (My students used to swear that smoke actually issued from my ears when I got onto UI.)
While PC sales continue to crash, Mac is gaining market share, as the only company whose sales are growing.
My response had everything to do with what you said, to wit:
My original statement had nothing at all to do with which system is ostensibly superior, but anecdotally related that MS systems were/are the dominant PC in the business world. From that, you attributed the “97%” logical fallacy to my remarks and now you say…? You clearly made the “97%” statement and I clearly addressed that statement. How does that have “nothing to do with what [you] said?
BTW, you may find that I frequently describe aspects of human consciousness which I find to be both anomalous and representative of the way we all are. I’ve even done the same in at least one other post in this thread, regarding Mr. Bill Gates. My remarks have more or less been reports on my observations, yet you’ve ascribed two actions to me which are not extant- a claim of PC superiority by numbers deployed and an attribution of one man’s behavior as a character flaw. Those things are coming from your mind, not mine.
We’re obviously talking past each other.
No mention so far of RISC OS – an excellent OS which I drop into almost as soon as I switch on my laptop. Have to use Win 7 for browsing, though. Its seems to work fine with Firefox.
Geo,
Bill Gates Bets On Next-Gen Nuclear
http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/24/nuclear-power-innovation-technology-ecotech-bill-gates.html
He is right about Representative Democracy being a problem but not for the right reasons. After all, it is a misnomer and has devolved into an oligarchy in sheep’s clothing over the past couple decades.
Bill Gates was simply the lucky one – a bright guy in the right place at the right time.
But their is some mileage in his assertions about democracy. In the UK and (I suspect) much of the democratic western world, opinion is fed by the media to the masses, a large proportion of whom are ill educated, ill informed and often plain stupid.
There are very good arguments to restrict democratic rights to those who have the capability to make at least an intelligent judgement, even if it is not necessarily particularly well informed. A minimum level of broad educational attainment would be the measure, not money, position or privilege.
This makes good sense aside from the risk that if 30-50% of the population are disenfranchised, they could be wholly socially disruptive or even destructive.
We are therefore left with the unwelcome reality of the media, and the wealthy who can influence the media, making the rules!
Totally agree with you!
The problem is who gets to decide who knows enough to be allowed to vote.
The human tendency is to assume that anyone who agrees with you is smart, and those who don’t are dumb.
I like the idea of only letting people who are net taxpayers vote. If your income is derived from govt. You stay home on election day.
Unfortunately many of todays opinion leaders such as Bill Gates or Jeremy Corbyn in your home country, new leader of the Opposition labour party, an avowed Marxist in favour of national Socialism – reference intended – are expensively “educated” in private schools.
Mr Corbyn’s idyllic upbringing and public school education is described thus (you could probably just swap Bill for Jes and the bucolic greenery of Wiltshire for Seattle to get the same story)
Born in Chippenham, Wiltshire, he (Corbyn) spent his first five years in a five-bedroom detached house in half an acre of land in the picturesque village of Kington St Michael. The property was recently put on the market for $931,378.50 (£610,000).
The family moved to Shropshire when Corbyn’s father, David, a brilliant electrical engineer, changed jobs. They settled into Yew Tree Manor, a seven-bedroom house that was once part of the Duke of Sutherland’s Lilleshall estate. The house had two acres of land, outbuildings and a paddock.
Though Corbyn’s parents — his mother Norma was a scientist who retrained as a maths teacher — were long-standing members of the Labour Party, rather than send Jeremy (who had three older brothers, Edward, Andrew and Piers) to the local state school, they enrolled him in private school Castle House, where fees today cost more than $10,687.97 (£7,000) a year.
Corbyn and Gates have both been expensively “educated”and so they would be the perfect elites to direct and control the lives of us plebians and yet because of/or in spite of their educations, their priviledged upbringing and their financial independance they still hold statist views.
So I and I expect many others would strongly resist any attempts to restrict voting rights to “educated men” such as Corbyn or Gates.
And the trend of the haves raising their kids as semi gods will continue. Their power will increase as will the appeal to mass movements meant to assert their all knowingness.
All this knocking of Windows 10 and Mr Gates is exhibiting one problem.
There are simple ‘anyone can understand it’ explanations of warming ‘it is just like a greenhouse’ followed by simplistic ‘energy budget’ diagrams and maths – all based on incorrect assumptions. There is no similar easy to understand explanations of why these simplistic hypotheses and the assumptions they are based on are wrong. They are demonstrably wrong as none of the predictions made based on them has proven correct: and, unlike politics, validation of predictions based on hypotheses is a fundamental tenet of real science.
Perhaps a diagram showing that over 70% of the world covered in water ‘downwelling’ (sic) infrared has no effect as it doesn’t warm water. Then ask how many extra pico-seconds any infrared ‘scattered’ by CO2 will actually remain in the atmosphere and does that trivial delay count as a ‘warming’ effect. Then point out that temperature is actually not a measure of heat in the atmosphere and that due to enthalpy (the specific heat of air containing water vapor) the humid 70F evening air in Louisiana has almost double the heat energy of the 100F dry afternoon air in Arizona so all the temperature averaging maths results (are you listening Bill Gates) are not measuring trapped heat at all and may instead just be an indication of atmospheric humidity.
I feel dropping into calculus and arguing very detailed science is not the way to go. If it cannot be shown in ‘South Park’ style then the target audience (including those like Bill Gates) will switch off.
He reminds me of a James Bond villain a great deal of money, a misplaced sense of superiority and too much time on his hands.
Gates is not the first or only greenie to come out with the anti-democratic line. In Australia we had a would be politician Clive Hamilton (now a tenured academic) who stood for the Greens a couple of elections ago. Hamilton came out with the unprompted (self-revealing) statement that if the voters would not support strong anti- emissions policies it might be necessary to suspend democracy -no doubt so self- appointed worthy citizens such as he could take decisions in the interests of all -the line run by all autocrats and would be dictators over the centuries.
He followed this up with the anti -growth line that as economic growth went in parallel with emissions of CO2 then we should aim for a low to zero growth economy-pretty rich coming from him as a tenured academic who would go on being paid by those taxpayers still in a job.-nor did he explain how the nation was going to find work for the thousands of asylum seekers his Green party was in favour of allowing to enter the country aided by people smugglers in nearby South East Asia countries.
Thankfully the voters were less than impressed by this self serving nonsense and Hamilton did not get elected