• 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…