Individuals with values you respect the most.

[NinjaKilla]

I can't read on the bus cos it makes me feel sick. Instead I either think about essays, or I think about questions as above.

Gonna keep this short cos I'm Hank Marvin' but here's my five:-

Napoleon - greatest leader in history. Not just for his military achievements but also for his political work.

Thomas Cochrane - a British naval hero who's outstanding quality was his bravery and calculated risk-taking.

Carl von Clausewitz - 19th military philosopher who's ideas still dictate modern strategic thinking. A genius.

Ronaldo - for a couple of years we saw the greatest footballer the world has ever seen. After a serious injury he is battling back.

Hmm need to think a a fifth... someone who helped people rather than killed them... hmmm

Who do you most admire (and don't say my mum )?

[Inferno]

Gotta be Bll Gates.

Started off by writing a BASIC compiler for the old MITS Altair...and now owns the largest software corporation in the world.

[Rosacrux]

Inferno

you have a rather dissapointing value set, if your hero is Billy Gates... and you have also a rather misinformed opinion on his start... quite wrong.

Kaynes should be my hero. A great man, saved the game for the "free world" back in the 20's, when he came up with the only way to salvage capitalism and drag it out the dead (socially and economically) end capitalism ended up because of it's limitations.

Based on personal values, there are millions of people out there who deserve our respect and admiration, but they never make headlines.

[Inferno]

Quote[/b] (Rosacrux @ Nov. 26 2002,07:12)]Inferno

you have a rather dissapointing value set, if your hero is Billy Gates... and you have also a rather misinformed opinion on his start... quite wrong.

Kaynes should be my hero. A great man, saved the game for the "free world" back in the 20's, when he came up with the only way to salvage capitalism and drag it out the dead (socially and economically) end capitalism ended up because of it's limitations.

Based on personal values, there are millions of people out there who deserve our respect and admiration, but they never make headlines.

A "rather disappointing value set"? In your opinion, yes? Personally I believe the person who brought computers to the masses should be revered. You wouldn't be on this forum now if not for him (MTW wouldn't exist.)

Misinformed on his start? I feel you are again wrong.

http://www.mackido.com/History/Gates_a_Genius.html

Life history of Bill Gates. Maybe you should read it before telling me I don't know how Gates started?

If you are too lazy to read it, allow me to post an extract:

"Bill Gates (after dropping out of college) and a friend (Paul Allen) started making software (Mid 70's). The first thing they did was steal (uh, borrow?) some computer time from a college and they implemented Basic (a Language) for the Altair Computer (made by MITS). Basic had been around for many years before Bill implemented a version of it . They did provide a service, but it is not that impressive technically to take public domain code from one machine and port it to another. Yawn. It was also very questionable (ethically) to sell a language who's definition was in public domain, and develop it on computer time borrowed from a school. But I don't think ethics bother Bill Gates too much -- and in the over all scheme of things, this was one of the lesser of the "moral gray areas"

Moral of this post: don't flame someone unless you A) know they are wrong (which you blatantly didn't) or B) Like bring proven wrong in public.

[Inferno]

Quote[/b] (Rosacrux @ Nov. 26 2002,07:12)]Inferno

you have a rather dissapointing value set, if your hero is Billy Gates... and you have also a rather misinformed opinion on his start... quite wrong.

Kaynes should be my hero. A great man, saved the game for the "free world" back in the 20's, when he came up with the only way to salvage capitalism and drag it out the dead (socially and economically) end capitalism ended up because of it's limitations.

Based on personal values, there are millions of people out there who deserve our respect and admiration, but they never make headlines.

And, by the way, in my eyes, any advocate of capitalism deserves disdain, not praise.

[Rosacrux]

Huh? Interesting, that your statement

Quote[/b] ]And, by the way, in my eyes, any advocate of capitalism deserves disdain, not praise.

contradicts with your praise on Gates... Gates is a multibillionaire, thus definitely one of those Keynes tried to regulate with his introduction of the economic system that was named after his (Keynesian). The New Deal was based on Keynes and also the economical policy of the west up until Reaganomics and Thatchernomics arrived (early 80s). It "saved" capitalism's arse by adopting certain socialist elements (wellfare, regulated private sector, large public sector etc. etc.) in the capitalist society. Either that or corporate terrorism, which was the case before 1930.


I am not flaming you (flaming Inferno? Now, that's futile) I just think you should read other sources about Bill Gates start rather than something entitled "Bill Gates a genious"

If it wasn't for Billy (who did good only to his own pocket and bank account, by aquiring in a ...rather suspicius way the vault of his career - DOS - and by ripping off better OS thereafter) there were thousands of others who'd brought "the computers to the masses", and probably without the hassle that DOS caused and still causes (to those unlucky ones having to work with Win 98 or Me).

If you really want to give praise to someone, praise IBM. They opened the PC standard for everyone.

[Inferno]

Quote[/b] ]I am not flaming you (flaming Inferno? Now, that's futile) I just think you should read other sources about Bill Gates start rather than something entitled "Bill Gates a genious"

Point fairly taken, although you will find many accounts of this on the web, not just this one. I gurantee you that what I wrote about Gates is true.

Quote[/b] ]If it wasn't for Billy (who did good only to his own pocket and bank account, by aquiring in a ...rather suspicius way the vault of his career - DOS - and by ripping off better OS thereafter) there were thousands of others who'd brought "the computers to the masses", and probably without the hassle that DOS caused and still causes (to those unlucky ones having to work with Win 98 or Me).

It is, of course, possible that someone else would have brought out an OS that is easy enough for complete novices to use yet has enough power for professionals. However, MS was the company that did it first. (And, BTW, I'm a computer programmer, and 98 is still my favourite version of Windows. If you would like, I can provide many reasons as to why it is better than 2K/XP, you just have to ask. :-))

Quote[/b] ]If you really want to give praise to someone, praise IBM. They opened the PC standard for everyone.

Actually, IBM *deliberately* used the slowest, worst chip they could find for their first PC. Anything better would have made the PC as powerul as their own Micro Computer, which they certainly did not want. If IBM had put in the best chip (which was at least 8 times faster), computers would be quicker and far easier to build today.

I'm not trying to get into a point making war here, Rosacrux, I'm just saying that you shouldn't say that someone is wrong unless you are 100% sure.

[Rosacrux]

You are not working for MS now, are you?

But, seriously, there are at least a hundred Bill Gates bios out there, most of them tell what I consider the truth, while others are praise and only praise (as the one you provided).

I don't consider the man a paradigm of a sort, even though I have to admire that he became multibillionaire while he started up only as a millionaire

But that's it. In no possible way he could be called a role model for anyone except wannabes R&F (rich and famous).

BTW I am not a programmer myself, just a technical editor for a comp magazine but... why on earth is Win98 your favorite OS to programm for? That's the most twisted thing I've ever heard by a programmer

[rasoforos]

rosacrux are you an economist or something? not many paople know kaynes.

[Rosacrux]

Quote[/b] (rasoforos @ Nov. 26 2002,09:08)]rosacrux are you an economist or something? not many paople know kaynes.

You know, that's precisely the problem with "many people": They know too litle. That's why they accept Bozos like Reagan or Thatcher stating ad hoc that "the economy is not good, it has to be more free" and ...there come the neoclassical and the Chicago school and the neo-lessaiz faire guys. And we end up with 1% of the planet population owning 99% of the planets wealth.

BAH

No, not an economics expert of any kind, I am just interested into economics, politics, sociology and history.

[Inferno]

Quote[/b] (Rosacrux @ Nov. 26 2002,09:07)]You are not working for MS now, are you?

But, seriously, there are at least a hundred Bill Gates bios out there, most of them tell what I consider the truth, while others are praise and only praise (as the one you provided).

I don't consider the man a paradigm of a sort, even though I have to admire that he became multibillionaire while he started up only as a millionaire

But that's it. In no possible way he could be called a role model for anyone except wannabes R&F (rich and famous).

BTW I am not a programmer myself, just a technical editor for a comp magazine but... why on earth is Win98 your favorite OS to programm for? That's the most twisted thing I've ever heard by a programmer

If I was working for MS I'd be sacked for saying I prefer 98.

And a small subset of my reasons for this preference are:

It allows direct hardware access.

It has full VESA support.

It can boot into 8MB ram.

The core files can fit on three floppy disks.

Win2K and XP will not run a host of games that were written before they were released...98 supports DOS games and Windows games equally. (Dungeon Keeper 2, for instance, will not work on 2K)

Quote[/b] ]But that's it. In no possible way he could be called a role model for anyone except wannabes R&F (rich and famous).

Or anyone looking to start their own software company (i.e. me )

[Jaguara]

Quote[/b] (Inferno @ Nov. 26 2002,08:58)]Actually, IBM *deliberately* used the slowest, worst chip they could find for their first PC. Anything better would have made the PC as powerul as their own Micro Computer, which they certainly did not want. If IBM had put in the best chip (which was at least 8 times faster), computers would be quicker and far easier to build today.

Brilliant,

Since the goal IBM had for the PC was to have an economical home version of their business machines, it makes sense that they would use a slower and less costly alternative, yes?

If they used thier fastest chip, sure the machine would run almost as fast as their business machines...but it would also end up costing almost as much.

It is almost like complaining that the Chevy Sprint does not come with a V8 engine and leather seats...

The fact is that IBM invented the concept of the home PC and they deserve credit for that at least - even if you are not happy with the method in which they did so.

IBM is actually responsible for a great many innovations in the computer industry - even today. I have always said that their greatest problem has always been their marketing department, which has screwed them at every turn. You are all impressed with Windows 98? Look at what OS/2 was doing when you were pounding away with that piece of crap called Windows 3.0.

Jaguara

[DojoRat]

It's hard to know the values of historical figures but here goes:

First to come to mind was Jimmy Carter. An ex-president who continued to work for the common good. Whatever your opinion on his presidency, he didn't just play golf or schmooze on some corporate board when he was done.

A general often over looked is George C Marshall. His achievements as US army chief of staff during WWII were amazing. He was so valuable that he was denied command of Overlord to keep him at his post. After the war, as US secretary of state he led the program to bring aid and developement to a devastated continent, better known as The Marshall Plan. Again you can disagree with his politics and the effectiveness of his programs but I truly admire his public service.

Basil Bunting, my favorite poet (1900-1985). Look him up. A younger contemperary of Pound from Northumbria who didn't care what people thought or what they wanted from poetry.. One of his major works, Chomei at Toyama, is a translation/reworking from a classical Japanese source that some of the forum members might like.

Archbishop Oscar Romero, El Salvador. Though he came from the elite he spoke out against the oppression from the right and was gunned down for it. He could've just kept silent or deplored 'all violence', but he didn't.

Medger Evers. Black civil rights organizer gunned down in '63. His murderers were just recently brought to justice. He should be put forward as a role model for all american kids, but sadly isn't.

The world is good at producing martyrs.

[NinjaKilla]

Quote[/b] (rasoforos @ Nov. 26 2002,09:08)]rosacrux are you an economist or something? not many paople know kaynes.

Do you mean kEynes?

I'm not disagreeing with your opinion at to his contribution to economics because I have read little old skool political science. All I know about him is that his demand management theories have been outmoded by supply-side solutions. But like I say he must have been talking sense cos every modern economics books are based on his work.

[rasoforos]

rosacrux : well kaynes was ok for a post-war economy where development is fast but it didnt really do well the last 20-30 years when economies are radically different than post-war. Even neo-caynessian theories cannot covered certain aspects of the economies and more or less adopt some classical theory. neoclassical might not be perfect but it is the best available to my opinnion. A book you might like about this debate is 'controversies of macroeconomics' ....but anyhows kaynesian theory help many nations rebuild themselves post-war so he is a great personality.



about bill gates: well he is a great , and he is a genious , he managed to become the richest person in the planet ( some years ago he was by far the richest ,now he is still but others got closer) , he managed to create a de facto monopoly that is not only strong but actually is welcome by many people , he keeps this monopoly from being broken , he can sell his stuff at crasy prices no matter the quality ,yes he practically stole the idea for windows BUT GOT AWAY WITH IT , to conclude he OUTSMARTS US ALL , since all of us here , at a point gave money to BG. NO hes not a computer genious , No i dont believe the pc revolution wouldnt happen in BG hadnt made windows but Yes i believe that when it comes to money this person is a genious.


P.S when i reach bill gates status i ll be selling worst stuff than he is ...at a more expensive price

[Sjakihata]

GANDHI

[Ktonos]

STALIN




(just kidding)

[Kongamato]

Personally, I choose Patton for one reason; he knows how to win. I find his "must win" attitude admirable. Without the kind of spirit leaders like him had, who knows how long the war would have lasted.

Few know about the work of Mr. Keynes, even fewer can spell his name.

[Tachikaze]

After NinjaKilla's mum, I would have to list:

Three Lawyers from American history --
Clarence Darrow
Thurgood Marshall
Ralph Nader

The members of taiko group Kodo

Author A.A. Milne

Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

[deejayvee]

Dr Timothy Leary.

[Rosacrux]

Rasoforos

That's a fallacy at best. Up until the late 70s, and despite the huge oil crisis in the same decade, development in Europe-USA-Japan and in the Far East was steady and satisfying, and also it involved lots of people - meaning we had a spread of wealth into the masses. The only price we had to pay was high inflation - frankly, a very little price compared with what we pay now.

After the introduction of Reaganomics-Thatchernomics (both inspired by the Chicago school and the neo-classicals, as we know) the new doctrine for the public sector is to minimize it's spendings and leave the development and economic growth to the private sector. Also, the only role of Central Institutions is to fiddle with the interest rates and that is bullshit - there is no way to convince me that only the fluctuation of interest rates can move an economy.

The adoption of the Neo-classical model has led to the demise of inflation, but also it has led to fabulous ups and downs, to inflated stock exchanges (that deflate rather stunningly, like the .com bubble burst for instance - not to mention Athens ) and most of all, to the absolute dependance of the worker upon the various market fluctuations, which means insecurity and also the gathering of wealth into the hands of the few. In the past two decades, the perc. of the people who have the 90% of the wealth in USA for instance, has gone down from 20%+ to less than 5% - higher even than what we saw in the times of Corporate Terrorism (before 1930). Can you say social and economical instability? Well, that's the deal. We are going down and we are going fast down.

Of course the Keynesian model without an adjustment to the current situation would fail blatantly, but there are numerous adjustments already introduced by Neo-Keynesian economists and I think we should switch to this model before it is too late.

[Hosakawa Tito]

I like Tachi's choices and would like to add George Washington to that list. He had foibles, like any of us, but after the defeat of the British in the American Revolution he could have become king/emperor of the US. In fact the majority of representatives in the Continental Congress clamored for and would have supported that to happen. George Washington refused, not wanting to replace one system of hereditary tyranny with another. It takes a wise and humble man to resist that temptation.

[hrvojej]

Vlado Gotovac