
Inside Bill’s Brain - ceecko
https://www.netflix.com/title/80184771?s=i&trkid=13747225
======
melling
Bill wrote about this on his blog yesterday:

[https://www.gatesnotes.com/About-Bill-Gates/From-the-
cutting...](https://www.gatesnotes.com/About-Bill-Gates/From-the-cutting-room-
floor)

It’s unfortunate that they were ready to build the TerraPower pilot nuclear
plant in China and the recent trade war prevented it.

[https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a25728221/te...](https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a25728221/terrapower-
china-bill-gates-trump/)

~~~
ben165
The sad thing is that the States aren't interested in this technology or why
does it take so long to get it done there? It would be great to use waste
material to get more energy out before burying it again. I'm from Germany,
sadly thou, most of the people are to uneducated and scared to push atomic
power station to the next level. Great documentation btw.

~~~
Dangeranger
The US is bifurcated between people who see no problem with current nuclear
plants and those who see any nuclear plant as an abomination in need of
removal.

It’s hard to have a reasonable debate about this issue when the sides are so
diametrically opposed due to their dogmatic beliefs.

~~~
JohnJamesRambo
The question is do we need nuclear and the risks? Can renewables like wind,
hydro, and solar provide what we need cheaper and without the dangers
associated with nuclear? If so, then why even mess with it?

~~~
adventured
It makes enormous sense to have some diversity in the electrical generation
system, along with the essentially guaranteed & dependable output of nuclear.
It's an excellent backbone. The US could very easily get to 30% renewables
(17-18% now), 30% nuclear (19%-20% now), 40% natural gas (35%-36% now), from
where the figures are at today. That ends coal. Then push forward on reducing
the natural gas share thereafter. 30%-40% nuclear and 60%-70% renewables long-
term, would perhaps be ideal.

We could trivially float ~$200 billion to build new nuclear plants and rapidly
wipe out all the remaining coal power along with a modest increase in
renewables and natural gas, rather than following the gradual coal decline
route.

60 nuclear plants are giving us 19-20% of our power base now. It'd cost
~$200-$250 billion to take that up to 30%, assuming $7 billion each. Even if
the cost were $10b each ($300b total), it'd be fine. The nuclear plants buy us
many decades to keep pushing renewables higher. It's an irrelevant dollar
price to pay, shouldered over decades (low yield debt), for the benefits. And
it keeps our generation diversity intact.

~~~
laurencerowe
$10B seems cheap. Hinkley Point C is currently estimated at $25B.

------
Holden83z
My problem with the documentary series is that they gave Bill Gates credit for
inventing DOS. This starts at 34:00 in episode two.

There was no mention at all that Microsoft bought it.
[https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-bought-ms-dos-os-
ea...](https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-bought-ms-dos-os-early-ibm-
pcs-july-27-1981)

This happens frequently in business and tech. CEOs look like geniuses when
they can take credit for the work of others.

~~~
pedalpete
I normally agree with this, but it can be distracting to an audience which may
not be completely familiar with the ins-and-outs of the details.

It's the same as when people say that Elon Musk is the founder of Tesla, and
most people have never heard of Martin Eberhardt (who I think had another
partner who's name I can't remember!).

------
jasoneckert
I'm not a fan of documentaries, but I liked this one (all three parts). It's
Bill essentially saying "You know - this is what matters, the Microsoft stuff
is secondary." And I respect that.

The Steve Jobs documentaries were more like "Hey, this guy was a douche, but
people worship the cult he made from peddling computer stuff, and that is
good, right?"

Definitely a difference in approach.

~~~
tempsy
I don't understand your logic here. He is using his money, influence, and
platform to rewrite history. That is called propaganda in certain contexts.

~~~
Reedx
What is being rewritten exactly? I don't see where they are claiming Microsoft
didn't happen.

~~~
tempsy
I’m commenting on OP’s respect for someone using his money and influence to
release a documentary where he writes off that one time he broke the law to
crush his competitors as “secondary” to his charitable work.

It’s especially interesting since we’re becoming acutely aware of how the rich
regularly wash their reputations through charitable work e.g. Epstein and the
Sacklers.

Only the wealthy get to influence the public perception of their legacy. I
don’t understand what is so admirable about that.

~~~
hogFeast
Many of the things that he is doing also have huge political implications.

From the U.S. that isn't obvious. Some wealthy guy can dole out cash but the
system is stable, so that is fine. Outside of the U.S. the opposite is true.
Wealthy guy comes in and starts handing out cash, and that occurs within a
political context (which is often the issue: these places often don't lack
money or tech, what they lack is stable politics). Even something as simple as
building hospital or a library is huge politically (i.e. what contractors and
suppliers you choose).

Given Gates' record for disregarding law, there should definitely be far
greater oversight from home governments. One cautionary tale is Soros in
Russia: he believed, even after he worked out that Yeltsin was horribly
corrupt, that he could keep donating to "neutral" causes...this turned out to
be quite wrong (as Soros has admitted). And Soros is many times smarter than
Gates about these issues, and at that time was choosing donations personally
(I have not heard great things about the "disciples" that Gates has on the
ground).

Again, this is really something that Gates should not be in a position to do.
You can't just outsource foreign policy to wealthy people.

~~~
jacobolus
There are big implications inside the US too. Gates favors large-scale
privatization of American public schools and de-professionalization of
schoolteachers, and his “philanthropy” is actively harmful to US students.

Public policy should be decided by the public, not by the whims of
unaccountable billionaires, however pure their intentions might be.

~~~
hogFeast
But the point is that if you do that within the U.S. that occurs within a
stable policy context.

I accept the idea that this spending feels uncontrolled. Education policy is
one area where you see this kind of activity because power is often local and
fragmented which makes it easier to control. But there is still a relatively
stable context with good oversight.

Imagine that occurring but there is no oversight: no teacher unions, no state
govts, no opposition govt, no media, no oversight or reporting of meetings
with NGOs, no reporting of donations, and (potentially) some level of govt
that is captive.

And it doesn't need to be about Gates aiming to influence public policy
directly. But actions that seem neutral, building a school or providing
vaccinations, often occur in a political context (Mugabe was notorious for
controlling the provision of aid around elections).

------
shadypupper
I tried to watch it, but it just felt like a 'Bill Gates' public profile PR
piece. Basically just espousing how great Bill and his family are and were at
all points in history.

~~~
joezydeco
I regularly get downvoted for pointing out that Saint Bill the Philanthropist
refuses to acknowledge all the shitty behavior and the damage he left behind
to earn him that fortune in the first place.

~~~
ScottFree
Not to mention his philanthropy work frequently causes considerable damage
itself, like the malaria nets[0] that poisoned the local food supply, the
failed public school overhaul[1] and common core[2][3].

[0]: [https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/25/world/africa/mosquito-
net...](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/25/world/africa/mosquito-nets-for-
malaria-spawn-new-epidemic-overfishing.html)

[1]: [https://nancyebailey.com/2018/07/04/gatess-blunders-
destroy-...](https://nancyebailey.com/2018/07/04/gatess-blunders-destroy-
teachers-and-public-schools/)

[2]: [https://www.philanthropydaily.com/gates-philanthropy-
failure...](https://www.philanthropydaily.com/gates-philanthropy-failure-
common-core/)

[3]:
[https://www.learningsuccessblog.com/blog/dyscalculia/common-...](https://www.learningsuccessblog.com/blog/dyscalculia/common-
core-update-feelings-more-important-accuracy-math-answers-dyscalculia)

~~~
mjfl
Can’t do anything to please you people, even spending 35 billion a year on
charity wouldn’t suffice.

~~~
delusional
Donate the money to someone completely independent, and stop talking about it.

~~~
mjfl
don't sell yourself short, I'm sure you could find an issue with it even if he
did that.

------
thunderbong
I just binge watched this. It was a really nice documentary.

Some of the things I didn't know about Bill Gates -

1\. He loves diet coke! At one time he opens a refrigerator and it's only
stacked with diet coke cans.

2\. He reads a crazy amount of books. And he reads them, takes notes and is
able to retain all that information. I found that remarkable.

3\. He works hard. Really hard. And he takes on problems which seem
insurmountable. Whether it's polio eradication, clean water, or nuclear
reactors. And he approaches the problems from a technical point of view.

Some of the lines which I liked -

Director: I looked into the most prevalent criticisms of you, and this one
actually seems the most relevant. "He's a technophile that thinks that
technology will solve everything."

Bill: Yeah, I'm basically guilty of that. Any problem... I will look at how
technical innovation can help solve that problem. It's the one thing I know
and the one thing I'm good at. And so, you know, that's my hammer. And so lots
of problems look like nails because I've got a hammer.

Director: Is there a part where you say, "This is way too hard, I took on too
much, I quit".

Bill: Sometimes, you really do have to say, "Let's give up". And sometimes,
you have to just say, "I need to work harder"

Mary Gates (Bill's mother): "Each one of us has to start out with developing
his or her own definition of success. And when we have these specific
expectations of ourselves, we're more like to live up to them. Ultimately,
it's not what you get or even what you give. It's what you become."

------
traverseda
Maybe this is unfair, but I hope they at least touch on the halloween
documents and the antitrust suite. Anything that touches on microsoft's
history should at least mention the anti-competitive practices they used to
cripple competition.

~~~
htk
From my understanding, the documentary is about what Bill Gates is doing, and
what inspired him.

IMHO his cutthroat tactics leading Microsoft are already well documented and
have nothing to do with the great work he’s doing now.

~~~
rhizome31
Without entering the debate regarding whether Gates foundation does more good
than damage, it seems a bit of a stretch to say that this is unrelated to his
earlier business practices. It's fair to imagine that those practices have
contributed to put him in a situation where he can do what he does now.

~~~
clarkevans
Conversely, those same practices prevented others from being in a position
where they could have likewise been generous. The iron fist of concentrated
power, even when wrapped in a velvet glove of generosity, is simply bad for
society.

~~~
BubRoss
Interestingly, one of the things short sellers noticed from investigating
corrupt and dishonest companies is that they frequently use charitable deeds
to compensate for the damage they do as a company.

------
GimbalLock
I found it pretty surprising how much they romanticized his years of working
instead of sleeping. That’s a dangerous thing to promote.

~~~
immichaelwang
It's supposed to be an honest raw look at his life. And frankly, it makes a
lot of sense that he had poor work life balance. It's to be expected that
extraordinary effort is required to build extraordinary things.

~~~
GimbalLock
They could’ve told it honestly without making it seem like sleep deprivation
is noble. Great things can be achieved with proper sleep and not falling
asleep at your keyboard just to wake up and keep coding “right where you left
off” as they claim.

~~~
mav3rick
Thats rarely true. No extraordinary thing was made with a 9 to 5 and then zone
out.

------
danmaz74
I binged this yesterday. I didn't particularly enjoy the way they mixed Gate's
early story with his current endeavours with the foundation, but all in all
it's still interesting enough.

~~~
rantwasp
to me it made sense. it was a parallel between his early years and what he was
doing now - basically applying the same way of thinking/working just for a
different class of problems.

------
beigeoak
Carmack just tweeted this about Gates:

 _I only met Bill Gates once, but I was very impressed — I was going on about
problems in the windows graphics stack, and despite it not being his
expertise, I thought he “got it” faster than his domain experts in the room._

The replies are filled with similar anecdotes.

tweet:
[https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1175405258975141893](https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1175405258975141893)

------
Uhuhreally
now let me ask this: is Gates smarter and harder working in proportion to his
wealth than Knuth ?

~~~
mav3rick
How does it matter ? You may be both but unlucky or not market your skills.

~~~
Uhuhreally
because he has been awarded by the putative meritocratic competition a vast
sum of money for his mediocre operating system

~~~
mav3rick
Wohoo Year of the Linux Desktop. Best Desktop OS ever.

------
droopyEyelids
It's sad that there is an extremely interesting documentary that could be done
about Bill Gates, but all we get is his propaganda.

Gates is turning into a Soros like figure, and there are all sorts of
interesting and controversial wrinkles in the story of the man.

Even just looking at the story of Gates's influence at Vox would be
interesting, without even trying to make hay of his relationship with Stephen
Pinker.

Anyway, Citations Needed did a couple episodes (45 & 46) on Gates that are a
good introduction.

[https://soundcloud.com/citationsneeded/episode-45-the-not-
so...](https://soundcloud.com/citationsneeded/episode-45-the-not-so-
benevolent-billionaire-bill-gates-and-western-media)

~~~
curiousDog
Will you guys please stop with the Soros bashing? There's literally no basis
for all the BS being spewed about a self-made man like that.

~~~
plemer
Calling for a more nuanced rendering of someone’s character isn’t “bashing”,
nor does being a “self-made” man disqualify one from criticism.

~~~
turbinerneiter
The whole Soros story is an anti-Semitic smear made up by Orbans team to win
elections in Hungary. Nobody would give two shits about Soros if it wasn't for
that. No matter how true it might be that he earned some of his money to the
detriment of others, the only reason why it's being discussed is is so that
Orbans has a virtual enemy to win against.

~~~
deogeo
Which parts of

 _CEU was founded in 1991 by hedge fund manager, political activist, and
philanthropist George Soros [..] A central tenet of the university 's
philosophy is the promotion of open societies._ [1]

 _major donations from some of the nation’s wealthiest liberal foundations,
including [..] the Open Society Foundations of the financier George Soros
[..]. Over the past decade those donors have invested more than $300 million
in immigrant organizations, including many fighting for a pathway to
citizenship for immigrants here illegally._ [2]

are made up?

When China opens their Confucius Institutes to expand their soft power and
propaganda, this is seen as problematic. But when Soros does the same, it's
OK, because you agree with his goals? It shouldn't surprise you that people
who don't share his goals view him with hostility.

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

[2] [https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/us/obama-immigration-
poli...](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/15/us/obama-immigration-policy-
changes.html)

~~~
turbinerneiter
It's not about disagreeing with his goals, it's about stylizing him as a
Boogeyman using anti-Semitic tropes for political gains.

The people who call Soros their enemy are literally fighting against liberal
democracy. Orban himself states as his goal a illiberal democracy.

You can disagree with Soros views on immigration, but there is no way in hell
you can defend what has been done to him. What Soros advocates is a viable
political position, what Orban advocates is the death of democracy.

~~~
deogeo
> The people who call Soros their enemy are literally fighting against liberal
> democracy.

I haven't kept up with all the things Soros has been accused of (falsely or
not), but isn't this statement also making them into boogeymen? They can't
possibly be just against a handful of policies he's pushing in their country -
they must be against liberal democracy itself? Why are the only two choices
Soros, or enemies of liberal democracy? Assuming you didn't use "people who
call Soros their enemy" to only refer to Orban's government.

I'll agree that Orban (and others) fabricated smears against Soros, but it's
false to extend that to "the whole Soros story".

~~~
turbinerneiter
Well, let's try: shoe me one valid point of critisim against Soros promoted
ideas that is not illiberal.

~~~
deogeo
I'm not sure if it's liberal or not, but opposition to immigration seems
perfectly legitimate to me, and is directly opposed to Soros' goals.

