Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

Dev.SN ♥ developers

posted by janrinok on Monday March 17 2014, @08:03PM   Printer-friendly
from the borg-revisited dept.

sl4shd0rk writes:

"Bill Gates says everyone needs to prepare to be out of work in 20 years due to Robots/software taking over most jobs. In preparation for this, Gates recommends people 'should basically get on their knees and beg businesses to keep employing humans' and reduce operating overhead for businesses by 'eliminating payroll and corporate income taxes while also not raising the minimum wage'. Bill Gates, you may recall, is the former CEO of Microsoft whose business acumen has brought the technology sector such things as Metro, Windows Phone and Xbox One.

BusinessInsider took a similar theme earlier this year."

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by theluggage on Tuesday March 18 2014, @08:40AM

    by theluggage (1797) on Tuesday March 18 2014, @08:40AM (#18035)

    Bill Gates, you may recall, is the former CEO of Microsoft whose business acumen has brought the technology sector such things as Metro, Windows Phone and Xbox One.

    Exactly. If you can sell that sort of shit to billions of people then you are really good.

    I don't think Gates can be blamed for Metro (or, more specifically, the decision to force it on desktop users), though.

    Anyway, even after the last crash, the world still seems to be running on ponzi-scheme economics based on the illusion of infinite growth. Sooner or later, there's going to be a total collapse beyond the ability of governments to bail out and nobody will have jobs. I think that's a bigger danger than the rise of the robots.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 18 2014, @09:19AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 18 2014, @09:19AM (#18062)

    He didn't sell it. The monopoly sold it for him. All he had to do was sit back and let it sell. He only inherited the monopoly from IBM because IBM was blocked by the courts and couldn't do it themselves. Even with that, it was his mom who scored him the meetings necessary to get that monopoly. Everything since then has been simply leveraging that monopoly. No business acumen involved at all. He's shown no evidence of a business sense at all unless you can attribute the initial Spyglass Mosaic contract to him. That was evil but pure genius.