Gates didn't take a life in building his fortune, but now he is saving lives. He is a net positive.
It goes a lot further than that, and most mobsters never murdered anybody. It's just business, right?
Besides that, the comparison was made not to suggest that Gates murdered people but that a life full of wrongs can not be justified by charity at the end of it. And to this day Gates profits every day from a lot of their uncompetitive actions. See 'the Microsoft Tax', the way they are co-opting Linux nowadays to lure people to Azure, the way in which they tried hard - and to some extent succeeded - in tainting FOSS, specifically the kernel either directly or by proxy and so on.
- killing independent software providers in a very determined way
- Embrace, Extend, Extinguish
- The SCO Saga
- The Browser Wars
- Forcing manufacturers to bundle Windows with their computers
The list is long. Whether Google, Apple or Facebook are more uncompetitive and more monopolistic today has no bearing on what MS did when it did.
And yes, there is plenty wrong with Google, Apple and Facebook (and a bunch of others) but they are not the subject here. That's classic 'whataboutism'.
You could get a lot more PR per dollar spending on something more emotional, less abstract, and more visible to the people he's trying to influence than the kinds of issues he works on.
He seems to spend more coherently with what you'd do if you were trying to actually do good than if you were just trying to optimize PR.
https://soundcloud.com/citationsneeded/episode-46-the-not-so...