
What I learned at work this year - johndbeatty
https://www.gatesnotes.com/About-Bill-Gates/Year-in-Review-2018
======
ssivark
_> [...] we are also going to be focusing more on improving the quality of
life. I think this will be the thrust of many big breakthroughs of the future.
For example, software will be able to notice when you’re feeling down, connect
you with your friends, give you personalized tips for sleeping and eating
better, and help you use your time more efficiently._

Seems like a retrofitted use case that is more of an answer to the question
"What could technology do next?" rather than the question "How to improve
quality of life?"

If one started with the latter question---which is what is worth answering---a
significant component of the answer would be to strengthen relationships and
make them more authentic. Since _the medium undeniably biases the message_ ,
it is important to prevent the disintermediation of relationships by
corporations looking to insert themselves (or their technology) into positions
from where they can better extract rent.

Technology can of course be useful in numerous ways, but the right solutions
would put human emotions and relationships front and center, and sparingly
sprinkle technical solutions only when needed -- and in many ways force people
to interact more directly, even if it were temporarily (somewhat)
inconvenient.

~~~
kinkora
I preface my statement below with a disclaimer that I live in a "developed" or
"1st-world" country but have previously lived and experienced other less
developed economies.

Anyway, it feels to me Gates is fixing a real problem but with very 1st world
solutions?

 _> For example, software will be able to notice when you’re feeling down,
connect you with your friends, give you personalized tips for sleeping and
eating better, and help you use your time more efficiently._

Maybe it is just the skeptic in me but it is a lil captain obvious that more
of those activities will give you a better quality of life. In fact, I will
say that most people are very aware that they should sleep or eat better or
even use their time efficiently and probably wouldn't need any form of
software to tell them that. I will even wager that the overwhelming number of
people that are feeling down, need more sleep or need to eat better can't do
so easily and is possibly due to their personal circumstances such as having
to work insanely hours due to (almost uncontrollable) working conditions
and/or have a low to middle wage job that won't allow them to have any spare
income to eat healthy/organic food.

This feels like a stereotypical 1st world solution to me that will only apply
to certain type of people and I say this as someone in the privilege position
to do so.

I know I sound dystopian but could someone refute my view? Am I missing
something?

~~~
rcates
I am sad to agree with you. We in tech love to believe - with our inflated
egos due to recent successes improving the world - that every problem is
solved through more tech. I think we need to watch tech fail to solve some
problems and experience that failure first hand to really believe that some
problems are rooted in culture and social norms, not in a lack of guidance or
convenience from some app.

I feel like we've lost connection and patience for each other from lack of
practicing empathy. More technology is not the answer to that. I hope we find
an equilibrium where we move past such an infatuation with tech that we let it
be the right amount of a participant in our lives and place more of an
emphasis on the human experience and condition and value our humanity first.

~~~
rcates
I guess what I'm saying is: if we need an app to remind us to call family,
maybe there's a larger problem at hand.

Book 4 of the Pendragon series (The Reality Bug) comes to mind. That was a
formative book in my young adulthood.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
People are lonely because corporate culture - including, but not limited to,
work culture - is outrageously demanding and often insane, not because they
need an app to remind them to phone grandma.

Everyone - who isn't financially independent - could benefit from shorter
hours and more creative freedom and financial security. Apps that try to
parent us are not a solution.

------
rtx
> Nuclear is ideal for dealing with climate change, because it is the only
> carbon-free, scalable energy source that’s available 24 hours a day. The
> problems with today’s reactors, such as the risk of accidents, can be solved
> through innovation.

So refreshing to see someone with his reach pushing for nuclear.

~~~
Retric
Though still missing the mark. Nuclear’s biggest issue is cost.

If it was cheap enough companies would have built more and scaled them up and
down to meet demand, instead France only got mostly Nuclear by exporting its
excess and nobody else really got very close to full nuclear.

The problem today is wind costs less. But, when you add a lot of wind during
times of high wind your nuclear becomes useless. This ends up driving up the
effective cost of nuclear even higher.

Storage makes this worse as you would then just want ever more wind due to
cost.

~~~
SCHiM
The cost is a political problem. It's easier for the opponents of nuclear to
find support for stricter and stricter safety laws for new reactors. Driving
up the cost, making them economically nonviable. Meanwhile the older and far
more dangerous reactors are rotting away and cannot be replaced (or are
replaced with fossil fuels).

It's been pointed out again, again and again. Coal plants pump out more
radioactive waste than is ever released by all the accidents to date, catching
a plane will irradiate you more than living next to one, etc. etc.

~~~
Retric
If that where true China would happily jump on the nuclear bandwagon. Instead,
they use minimal Nuclear because the basic cost of running a nuclear power
plant reasonably safely can’t become really cheap.

Nuclear in China is 40.6 GW vs 290GW or so total power production. They are
adding 14 GW but these things take time so the ratio will stay about the same.
Meanwhile they are ramping up wind and solar extremely quickly with a stated
goal of 1,300 GW of peak solar capacity by 2050 which they are on pace to
reach.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_China](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_China)

~~~
opo
Your comparisons between power production of nuclear and solar is somewhat
misleading since you are forgetting the low capacity factor of solar.

In terms of power production of solar in China:

>...The contribution to the total electric energy production remains modest[8]
as the average capacity factor of solar power plants is relatively low at 17%
on average. Of the 6,412 TWh electricity produced in China in 2017,[9] 118.2
TWh was generated by solar power, equivalent to 1.84% of total electricity
production.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_China)

In comparison:

>...Nuclear power contributed 3% of the total electricity production in 2015,
with 170 TWh,[1] and was the fastest-growing electricity source, with 29%
growth over 2014.[4

As far as long range plans in China:

>...By mid-century fast neutron reactors are seen as the main technology, with
a planned 1400 GW capacity by 2100

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China)

In short, it looks like China is doing what any smart country is trying to do:
develop all non-carbon based energy sources that they can.

~~~
Retric
First, however you want to slice it Nuclear is a low percentage of China’s
production. Even nuclear + wind + solar is not that huge, still the trends are
very promising.

But, I want to say that growth figure is misleading as it’s comparing as
specific year when a power plant came online. In terms of total TWh and rate
of increase wind beats nuclear. In terms of relative percentage increase Solar
is insane.

    
    
      Solar 2013 9 TWh
      Solar 2017 118.2 TWh
    
      Nuclear 2013 124 TWh
      Nuclear 2017 246 TWh
    
      Wind 2013 134.9 TWh
      Wind 2017 305.7 TWh
    

Looking at 2018 Solar’s insane year over year growth is starting to have a
huge impact and does not seem to be slowing down. In some ways even 2017
numbers are misleading.

    
    
      Solar, *capacity* added per year.
      2014	10,560
      2015	15,130
      2016	34,540
      2017	52,830

------
kosei
"[Warren Buffett] says his measure of success is, “Do the people you care
about love you back?” I think that is about as good a metric as you will
find."

I love this.

~~~
code_duck
So then why does he bother being an investor? He could probably find that
level of success working at Walmart and concentrating on his home life.

Given that he’s successful at investing, he must have some other standards.

~~~
bdhess
Maybe a good number of the people he cares about work at or invest in the
company he built?

------
ipython
Gates' resolution to learn and think more about the intersection between
privacy and innovation is absolutely spot on. I've been thinking about better
ways that we can approach chronic illnesses through health tracking, but
absolutely terrified of the implication of that data falling into the wrong
hands - and not even for nefarious purposes.

For example, I would not trust my health insurance company with information
that may indicate I am predisposed to an illness or disease lest they brand me
as a high risk, pre-existing condition patient, and deny or price me out of
coverage forever. I'd rather do my own experimentation outside of the
'official' medical community than to risk my own data being used as a weapon
against me.

Somewhat unrelated, I feel that the next underexplored area of medical science
is that of the gut & intestines. Having a toilet that could do continual
personalized analyses of your urine and stool is going to revolutionize
medicine. However, as much as I believe that this is an opportunity to change
the world for the better, I would never purchase such a device under the
current privacy and security climate. I hope we can start to resolve these
issues in 2019 and beyond so we can unlock these sorts of innovations to help
people on a daily basis with chronic conditions.

------
ratsimihah
> Did I devote enough time to my family? Did I learn enough new things? Did I
> develop new friendships and deepen old ones? These would have been laughable
> to me when I was 25

I'm almost 30 and those are my priorities, maybe that's why I am not as
"successful" as Bill Gates?

~~~
ArcMex
I was thinking something similar. I'm 28 and 2018 was a difficult year because
I had to end many, many friendships because it became harder and harder for me
to relate to them on a level I desire for my personal growth but I digress.
The fact that Gates mentions that he thinks about these things now as opposed
to his 20s makes me wonder if I am making the right decisions here. Still, I
have made great progress. Sober and cigarette free for over a year, in a
committed relationship for the first time since 7 years ago and a stable
income and some savings in there somewhere. So maybe there is benefit to be
had from being old young.

~~~
kamaal
>>I had to end many, many friendships because it became harder and harder for
me to relate to them

>>I desire for my personal growth but I digress.

>>The fact that Gates mentions that he thinks about these things now as
opposed to his 20s makes me wonder if I am making the right decisions here.

A few days back some one on HN mentioned that most people on earth, are not
going to terrible failures or spectacular successes.

Once you come to this realization. You will take your health, mental health,
friendships, relationships and hobbies far more seriously.

After a while all you want is a peaceful, normal life with happy relationships
and healthy body. After a while you can earn enough. And you are going to be
eating the same burgers, as a billionaire eats to fill stomach. The beef ain't
exactly going to come from heaven for trading extra efforts for sure failure.

>> Still, I have made great progress.

That which is in locomotion must arrive at the half-way stage before it
arrives at the goal.

— as recounted by Aristotle, Physics VI:9, 239b10

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#Achilles_an...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#Achilles_and_the_tortoise)

For a lot of things in life, there are indeed infinite sub tasks you need to
complete. Most of us aren't going to make it. Bail out while you have time.

------
davebryand
"We still need a lot of innovation to solve problems like malaria or obesity,
but we are also going to be focusing more on improving the quality of life."

To solve obesity we need the opposite of innovation. Nature has delivered the
perfect array of nutrition for the human animal to thrive. We have innovated
ourself into obesity and the reversion to the simple truth of natural
nutrition is the cure.

~~~
beat
"The simple truth of natural nutrition" is scarcity and starvation. Obesity is
a result of the ready availability of the kinds of foods (carbs and fat) that
are "naturally" hard to get, so our body hoards them when it has access. We
innovated ourselves into effectively unlimited food. All diets are unhealthy
if access isn't limited.

I like not going hungry on a regular basis. Most people do.

~~~
tozeur
Most healthy people I know aren’t chronically hungry. You’ll be chronically
hungry if your diet consists of simple carbs (white bread, soda, chips).

~~~
beat
I mean hunger from a lack of available food, not from eating food that
overstimulates your systems (the simple carbs). The solution to this is
primarily education (so people make healthy choices), and availability of
healthier alternatives.

That said, all of civilization is built on the ready availability of refined
carbs brought about by agriculture. This isn't a modern phenomenon. The only
modern thing is that suddenly our food production is outstripping population
growth for the first time in ever.

------
Aardwolf
If this is Bill Gates blog, I do wonder the following:

On first visit, it pops up a modal subscribe email dialog.

On a second visit, a distracting large survey thing slid in from the bottom.

Why would Bill Gates need spammy patterns that detract from reading the text
on his personal blog?

~~~
fabricexpert
He's still a brand that needs to be marketed

~~~
Aardwolf
Wouldn't his brand look better without these spammy things? It's a person
writing insightful stuff, not an entity shoving clickbait in your face.

------
thatfrenchguy
> software will be able to notice when you’re feeling down

Facebook-controlled depression, what a dream

~~~
r3bl
I keep spamming this link, but it's important to be repeated: Facebook already
intentionally manipulated emotions of a "small number of users" (700k), proved
it was possible, and released a paper on it almost half a decade ago.

[https://slate.com/technology/2014/06/facebook-unethical-
expe...](https://slate.com/technology/2014/06/facebook-unethical-experiment-
it-made-news-feeds-happier-or-sadder-to-manipulate-peoples-emotions.html)

~~~
trishmapow2
Link to paper:
[https://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788](https://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788).
(It does say 'massive-scale' though)

------
usaphp
> If you’ve never been exposed to the flu, it’s possible to make a vaccine
> that teaches your immune system to look for those structures and attack
> them. But once you’ve had the flu, your body obsesses over the strain that
> got you sick. That makes it really hard to get your immune system to look
> for the common structures.

Very interesting, I did not know that.

~~~
vincentmarle
Ah, so the body is basically overfitting the training data.

~~~
nikbackm
Probably better than the other way around.

------
peteretep
> The only problem where I don’t yet see a clear path forward yet is how to
> develop more efficient ways to recruit patients for clinical trials. Without
> a simple and reliable diagnostic for Alzheimer’s, it’s hard to find eligible
> people early enough in the disease’s progression who can participate in
> trials.

There’s an interesting use case for Facebook’s Machine Learning algorithms

~~~
yulaow
Oh please NO. Let's try to not insert facebook also in our supersensitive
medical data, considering how shady they are even with non-sensitive data it's
clear it won't end well at all.

~~~
peteretep
Medical data has strong governance around it

~~~
majewsky
Which is why Facebook should not be allowed to touch it with a ten-foot pole.

------
gamma-male
Are there other great and insightful blogs from important personalities like
this one? Maybe warren buffet's blog?

~~~
peteretep
Warren Buffet writes very insightful letters to shareholders of Berkshire
Hathaway which you can find online

~~~
rococode
Here's a link:
[http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/letters.html](http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/letters.html)

------
usaphp
> Unfortunately, America is no longer the global leader on nuclear energy that
> it was 50 years ago. To regain this position, it will need to commit new
> funding, update regulations, and show investors that it’s serious.

> We had hoped to build a pilot project in China, but recent policy changes
> here in the U.S. have made that unlikely.

Maybe running pilot projects in U.S. instead of China can solve the first
issue he mentions?

~~~
mattzito
Mere sentences later he says that they would like to do a pilot in the US but
regulatory constraints make it impossible.

~~~
bluquark
The whole section is kind of strange. First he says that he believes only
technology breakthroughs can solve the climate crisis, despite the expert
consensus that the technology is mostly there if the political will can be
found to disruptively deploy it.

So, presumably, he thinks that mustering the political will is intractable.
Then, a few paragraphs later, he admits that his preferred fix of nuclear
energy is also blocked by... political constraints. Why he thinks he'll make
more progress touting nuclear energy, which is wildly unpopular, instead of
"green jobs", which polls well, he doesn't say.

~~~
credit_guy
This note was quite short, so Bill Gates didn't go into much details.

The details are:

* Bill believes in a new nuclear fission technology that addresses the concern of nuclear waste, traveling wave reactor [1].

* He financed a startup called TerraPower [2] to demonstrate and then to put in use this technology

* Being aware of the strong anti-nuclear sentiment in the US and of the more friendly attitude in China, he signed an agreement with China National Nuclear Corporation to build a 600MW reactor in China

* With the new US administration more hawkish approach towards China, some new restrictions on nuclear deals were announced by the Department of Energy in October [3]

* Gates' TerraPower venture found itself in the crosshairs of these restrictions, so the deal with the CNNC became for all practical purposes void [4]

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling_wave_reactor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traveling_wave_reactor)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerraPower](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerraPower)

[3] [https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-announces-measures-
preve...](https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe-announces-measures-prevent-
china-s-illegal-diversion-us-civil-nuclear-technology)

[4] [https://www.rt.com/business/447910-bill-gates-nuclear-
china/](https://www.rt.com/business/447910-bill-gates-nuclear-china/)

~~~
pjc50
Hmm. No working examples, "maintenance free" (in reality this translates to
"maintenance impossible"), and uses liquid sodium as a coolant.

------
allentucker
We’re asking the guy who thought the internet had no potential to predict the
future?

------
lostmsu
IMHO, what he thought at 25 is more useful than what he thinks now.

~~~
kieckerjan
Say that again when he has eradicated polio or malaria.

~~~
lostmsu
Many would like to eradicate polio or malaria. The methods are known. Problem
is to get resources to do that. Those resources were created by the work of
25yo Bill Gates.

------
ensiferum
"We still need a lot of innovation to solve problems like malaria or obesity
..."

There's really no innovation needed for the latter. Just educate people and
when that fails implement better controls, i.e. sugar taxes on sodas and food.
Fundamentally the goal should be get rid of refined sugars in foods,
especially high fructose corn syrup.

~~~
hguhghuff
People become obese because of emotional issues.

~~~
douglaswlance
You can't over-eat spinach.

~~~
bitxbitxbitcoin
Popeye's relatively obese forearms would beg to differ.

------
cyrilllllll
In the same way that windows is not bug-free, nuclear plants are not safe, at
all. And they will never be.

Without considering accidents, for only 50 years of comfort, we have
shamefully produced deadly waste, that future generations will have to keep
confined at all costs for thousands and thousands and thousands of years.

Unlike CO2, uranium pollutes in the very long term, destroying all bacteria in
the environment. It is high time to get up-to-date with renewable sources of
energy.

~~~
cesnja
The very basic point you're using here might be incorrect [1]. The difference
is that all the nuclear radioactive waste is concentrated while the things
coming out of coal plants are significantly diluted and mixed with local air.
Therefore I think nuclear is better than coal plants even in the short term.

[1] [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-
more-...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-
radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/)

