Hacker News Reader

> Gates has never come across as completely depraved (greedy, maybe) so I don't think he was using Epstein's services,

Maybe Gates just has the wealth and skill to craft a PR image that covers up his depravity, so that you dismiss the conclusion of his affiliation with Epstein even after being confused as to what other explanation it might have.

> Maybe Gates just has the wealth and skill to craft a PR image that covers up his depravity

Many such cases.

There are numerous allegations from female staff at Microsoft extolling Bill Gates' creepiness. He seemed to have a bad habit of constantly asking his employees on dates, as well as making strange and awkward advances to women in the workplace. I'm not certain the full extent of his dealings with Epstein- we may never know given Gate's power and wealth, but it's fairly clear from just a bit of research that he has a very creepy side that is usually kept hidden from the media.

One plausible explanation that is less damaging: Gates is a utilitarian and determined that the net benefits that could come from networking with Epstein outweighs the risks.

It can kind of be perceived as the trolly problem in real life. Do you pull the lever and get one person's blood on your hands, but result in 4 met lives saved? Or do you stay morally pure by refusing to kill someone... and let the 5 people die by your inaction?

Gates does strike me as an analytical, ends-justify-the-means kind of guy

What are the benefits he derived?

Epstein was friends with many other wealthy people (who could potentially donate to the Gates foundation), and he had the power to persuade them.

Given the value of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, why would Gates spend any of his own valuable personal time networking to raise more money for it and not trying to put more of the existing money to work?

Seems like the opportunity cost of fundraising is high.

I can't imagine a single wealthy person that wouldn't take a cold call from Gates and probably at least agree to a sit down meeting on the spot. Epstein was virtually anonymous relative to Gates.

Media Lab, "Negroponte: Windows key to OLPC philosophy" https://www.cnet.com/news/negroponte-windows-key-to-olpc-phi... cha-ching!

I doubt Epstein could draw anyone that Gates couldn't draw himself.

I don’t know what Gates did, it’s possible the worst accusations are true but without evidence I won’t take it seriously. However, we do know that Epstein was essentially a very good conman. I can absolutely believe he figured out a way to ingratiate himself to his most important targets- it’s been suggested Gates thought he could help with a Nobel prize - something that sounds comical, but is absolutely the sort of ego trip you would sell to the worlds richest man.

Jeff: Hey Bill, Iv been watching a Tape of us having good time with the girls two years ago. They both turn 18 next month, how the time flies! You are invited to their birthdays. We should definitely hang out more.

> What was Gates doing and why is there a collective sigh about it? Tech does not care. Microsoft does not care.

Melinda does care.

This view of Gates is colored by his reimagining as managed by/with Melinda from the 90s on.

The MS crew whoring around in the 80s was a well known thing. Zebras dont change their stripes and none of this matters wrt to having a clue/foresight about vaccines and doing good things with wealth/influence.

I don't understand the down votes. You are spot on.

As someone not alive in the 80s, what does "The MS crew whoring around" mean? If "whoring around" means "sleeping around" (or even paying for sex) then I'm confused because that doesn't really compare to pimping teens.

well, if one is going around hiring sex workers, they'd need to contact a pimp, right?

Strictly speaking, no. But even if they did, it's a real stretch to try to say that people hiring sex workers are morally on the same level as men pimping teenage girls.

Maybe you're not very familiar with the details of the Epstein case, but "whoring around" doesn't even begin to capture the level of sociopathic harm that Epstein and his pedophile ring inflicted on the children it abused. If Gates was capable of partaking in that sort of arch predatory behavior, why in the world would anyone continue to trust him when it comes to any other matter? Even the ostensibly good stuff with no apparent harms or ill will could just be some kind of cover in service of a longer con.

> Gates is either careless, foolish, a creep, or all three.

Or there is something going on that we don't know about. It seems unlikely that all the politics in the world is conducted in places that random people like us have access to.

Stephen Hawking didn't seem like a sex pest either. It's too bad about them.

Charitable attribution? They have/had a shared interest in transhumanism and the funding of research in that area.

Non-charitable attribution? They like young girls.

I wouldn't even call the transhumanist part particularly charitable. Epstein's interest in it went hand-in-glove with his eugenicism -- he may have wanted to create tech to help him and his rich psycho friends live eternally as augmented superheroes, but that was never meant for the general betterment of humankind.

At least public evidence seems to indicate that Gates actually likes older women.