• explodicle@local106.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      With money he got from a monopoly, meaning the money he took plus the deadweight loss are even worse for humanity. Computers would be even better today if it wasn’t for him, and we would’ve produced better things than we have today.

      Monopolists “giving back” is insidious because it’s much easier to see what they gave us than what they took away.

      • Squizzy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        I agree with you but he’s not on the same page as Steve Jobs, not in my book. Billionaires can’t exist in a fair system so they’re existence isn’t justified but comparatively speaking he is better than Jobs

        We may have better computers but Malaria may be more of an issue, whereas without Jobs nothing of note would be missing other too many biopics.

        • lad@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          It might as well be that if Jobs were still alive, he’d be running some PR washing campaign to also be all good ¯_(ツ)_/¯

        • Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Malaria is still around though, spending pocket change for a cause doesn’t mean it’s helping (especially with all the strings attached if you actually get a grant).

          Malaria will be beaten with classic research. I mean it’s still all around…