Bill Gates Weighs In on US Pandemic Response, Encryption, and Grilling Tech Executives (arstechnica.com) 86
Bill Gates gave a wide-ranging new interview to Wired's Steven Levy (also republished at Ars Technica.) The interview's first question: as a man who'd been warning about a pandemic for years, are you disappointed with the response of the United States?
Bill Gates: Yeah. There's three time periods, all of which have disappointments. There is 2015 until this particular pandemic hit. If we had built up the diagnostic, therapeutic, and vaccine platforms, and if we'd done the simulations to understand what the key steps were, we'd be dramatically better off. Then there's the time period of the first few months of the pandemic, when the U.S. actually made it harder for the commercial testing companies to get their tests approved, the CDC had this very low volume test that didn't work at first, and they weren't letting people test. The travel ban came too late, and it was too narrow to do anything. Then, after the first few months, eventually we figured out about masks, and that leadership is important... [America's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] have basically been muzzled since the beginning. We called the CDC, but they told us we had to talk to the White House a bunch of times. Now they say, "Look, we're doing a great job on testing, we don't want to talk to you." Even the simplest things, which would greatly improve this system, they feel would be admitting there is some imperfection and so they are not interested.
Wired: Do you think it's the agencies that fell down or just the leadership at the top, the White House?
Bill Gates: We can do the postmortem at some point. We still have a pandemic going on, and we should focus on that....
Wired: At this point, are you optimistic?
Bill Gates: Yes. You have to admit there's been trillions of dollars of economic damage done and a lot of debts, but the innovation pipeline on scaling up diagnostics, on new therapeutics, on vaccines is actually quite impressive. And that makes me feel like, for the rich world, we should largely be able to end this thing by the end of 2021, and for the world at large by the end of 2022. That is only because of the scale of the innovation that's taking place...
This disease, from both the animal data and the phase 1 data, seems to be very vaccine preventable.
Gates also believes the government shouldn't allow encryption to hide "lies or fraud or child pornography" on apps like Facebook Messenger or WhatsApp -- prompting the interviewer to ask whether he's talked to his friend Mark Zuckerberg about it. "After I said this publicly, he sent me mail. I like Mark, I think he's got very good values, but he and I do disagree on the trade-offs involved there..."
Gates also thought today's tech executives got off easy with five hours of testifying before a Congressional subcommittee as a group of four. "Jesus Christ, what's the Congress coming to? If you want to give a guy a hard time, give him at least a whole day that he has to sit there on the hot seat by himself! And they didn't even have to get on a plane...!"
Gates added later that "there are a lot of valid issues, and if you're super-successful, the pleasure of going in front of the Congress comes with the territory."
Wired: Do you think it's the agencies that fell down or just the leadership at the top, the White House?
Bill Gates: We can do the postmortem at some point. We still have a pandemic going on, and we should focus on that....
Wired: At this point, are you optimistic?
Bill Gates: Yes. You have to admit there's been trillions of dollars of economic damage done and a lot of debts, but the innovation pipeline on scaling up diagnostics, on new therapeutics, on vaccines is actually quite impressive. And that makes me feel like, for the rich world, we should largely be able to end this thing by the end of 2021, and for the world at large by the end of 2022. That is only because of the scale of the innovation that's taking place...
This disease, from both the animal data and the phase 1 data, seems to be very vaccine preventable.
Gates also believes the government shouldn't allow encryption to hide "lies or fraud or child pornography" on apps like Facebook Messenger or WhatsApp -- prompting the interviewer to ask whether he's talked to his friend Mark Zuckerberg about it. "After I said this publicly, he sent me mail. I like Mark, I think he's got very good values, but he and I do disagree on the trade-offs involved there..."
Gates also thought today's tech executives got off easy with five hours of testifying before a Congressional subcommittee as a group of four. "Jesus Christ, what's the Congress coming to? If you want to give a guy a hard time, give him at least a whole day that he has to sit there on the hot seat by himself! And they didn't even have to get on a plane...!"
Gates added later that "there are a lot of valid issues, and if you're super-successful, the pleasure of going in front of the Congress comes with the territory."
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Thanks Bill (Score:5, Insightful)
He actually makes a good case in the article that the CDC has been handcuffed, and not allowed to do their job:
"I’m surprised at the US situation because the smartest people on epidemiology in the world, by a lot, are at the CDC. I would have expected them to do better. You would expect the CDC to be the most visible, not the White House or even Anthony Fauci. But they haven’t been the face of the epidemic. "
I know it is popular here to be critical of the Microsoft co-founder, but his recent behavior seems to be that of a man trying to rewrite his place in history. A lot of what the Gates foundation is doing is better than some governments, not that they've set the bar very high.
Re: (Score:2)
While it might be true, it's not usually the only/primary consideration.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Thanks Bill (Score:5, Informative)
I doubt Mr Gates is looking at a wiki and personally trying to provide CDC with recommendations. Just as the CDC hires experts and massively funds studies, the BMG Foundation does too. The CDC Foundation's entire purpose is to party with the likes of the BMG and filter that information up to the CDC to make federal policy.
Re:Thanks Bill (Score:4, Informative)
How did you get that from what he said? He clearly meant that the CDC was unable to do its job properly, that the science and expertise was limited and ignored.
That sounds about right, and for some other countries too like the UK. If there is anything we should learn from this it's that we need experts and all this anti intellectualism just gets people killed.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
He actually makes a good case in the article that the CDC has been handcuffed, and not allowed to do their job:
So the CDC has been handcuffed because they won't listen to him and politely refer him to the White House? Why should the CDC listen to him more than you or me? Because he has billions and some foundation?
He just sounds like a frustrated kid, wannabe expert if you ask me. Just let the CDC do their job, I am sure that they don't need his advice. Also, let the politicians talk to people like it should be. The CIA also has some of the smartest people in their field, do you see them talking to the public very often? Neither the CDC does that.
He leads a foundation that has billions of dollars and is a major player when it comes to vaccines and infectious diseases and is the second largest donor to the WHO (first if Trump actually does manage to stop funding permanently).
He's exactly the kind of person the CDC should be talking to. Partially because he leads an organization with resources the CDC could utilize. But also to make sure that him and his organization are on the same page as the CDC and don't start giving out a bunch of dumb advice tha
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have mod points today, but if I did, I'd try to give them all to this comment.
Re: (Score:2)
I watched a bunch of suits walk into the room and announce that HHS was going to be doing the briefings from now on instead of the doctors who had been doing it at the CDC. Take a look yourself, the epidemiologists were replaced by political messaging and it was a shitshow.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, the CDC could partner with an organization that is effective in delivering science based solutions for some medical problems. Or they could partner with the alleged administration who believe science is a Democrat dodge to stymie crackpot policies. Some choice.
Re:Thanks Bill (Score:5, Informative)
He actually makes a good case in the article that the CDC has been handcuffed, and not allowed to do their job:
"I’m surprised at the US situation because the smartest people on epidemiology in the world, by a lot, are at the CDC. I would have expected them to do better. You would expect the CDC to be the most visible, not the White House or even Anthony Fauci. But they haven’t been the face of the epidemic. "
I know it is popular here to be critical of the Microsoft co-founder, but his recent behavior seems to be that of a man trying to rewrite his place in history. A lot of what the Gates foundation is doing is better than some governments, not that they've set the bar very high.
My friends at the CDC have a lot of respect for Fauci. They will also admit that they made mistakes with their response. That being said, nearly everything they recommend is being shot down immediately by the top executive of the federal government. Some 'CDC' guidelines haven't even originated from them (specifically that school guidelines for sure) and they have to water down everything to get approval to publish it.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure it's an enviable environment for innovation.
Re: Thanks Bill (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. Everyone's hindsight is eerily accurate when not forced to go on record in the midst of the fray. Gates benefits from this, and current leaders are cursed by it
Re:Thanks Bill (Score:4, Insightful)
We're mostly not experts so does that mean none of us are allowed to discuss the pandemic then?
Who was claiming bills billions made him an expert? At what point did Bill say he wanted to do CDCs job for them?
There's plenty to criticise the guy for so why waste your breath with such meaningless statements. Like he invests billions into shitty companies that are making the world a worse place, billions that come from abusing monopoly position. And he barely spends the interest on good causes. And his money does nothing to address the worlds real problems of massive power imbalance causing starvation, short life spans, environmental degradation. Bills charity just tries do put patches on to the festering wounds that are symptoms of a badly run world rather than trying to fix the causes of those wounds.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
At what point did Bill say he wanted to do CDCs job for them?
Did you read the summary? He keeps on trying to tell the CDC what to do, and they keep telling him "no."
Re:Thanks Bill (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Thanks Bill (Score:2, Insightful)
"go try and talk to the white house [because our primary directive is to not embarrass the administration]"
This is called "finger pointing." I truly doubt that anyone at the White House was keeping track of the idiosyncratic power plays in middle management of the CDC that could have brought on more early testing by importing Covid19 tests.
Furthermore, the primary goal was to "slow the spread" and "flatten the curve" so hospitals would not be overwhelmed. Not stop outright Covid19 spread which was inevitable.
There was and is a minefield of problems to navigate with Covid19. People need to understand that any bu
CDC screwed up (Score:4, Insightful)
CDC was sidelined for a reason. They screwed the pooch on testing by not allowing private labs to test. They played politics with peoples lives just to embarrass the administration for cutting their funding. Now nobody trusts the people who said blocking flight from China was needed and wearing masks was harmful. Trump and company have made their share of mistakes but holding the CDC up as some kind of messiah is just fake news.
Re:Thanks Bill (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that was his point. We haven't let the CDC and the professionals do their job.
Instead, we have a bunch of craven clueless politicians "leading" the cover up.
Re: (Score:2)
If it is that good, that superior and that needed, LEAD by example and show us fools out here in flyover country how stupid we are.
You don't need Bill's help. You're already doing an excellent job of showing everyone how stupid *you* are. No need to drag your "flyover" neighbors into this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Weird...my reply got attached to the wrong post. Never mind.
Oh sure, if it were only that easy. Now I cannot un-know your comment was attached to the wrong post.
Re:Thanks Bill (Score:5, Insightful)
I think there are many people here on Slashdot that are skilled in topics that we don't hold degrees or valid credentials in. In fact, there are likely many of us that work in senior level positions in fields we didn't obtain credentials in. I for example am working in high energy physics with CERN and the LHC... though I never finished high school. I certainly am not a physicist, but I do understand much of what my credentialed colleagues say and convey what they say to other people more clearly than they can as the leap from CERN particle physicist to average moron is too far of a leap for them... but I'm much closer to moron and make a great jumping point. Does this mean I should not communicate in these circles? Should I not speak with my peers in other similar organizations to collaborate between teams?
Earlier today, I was in a discussion with some communications technologies researchers with regards to transport layer protocol research. The people I spoke with were highly educated and credentialed... I however am self educated and while I hold 30+ industry certifications in the field and I've been responsible for developing extensions to protocols used by billions of devices, I can not claim the same credentials as they are. Yet, I've been invited into their working group and to publish in their journals as I have a lot of practical experience in their field of research. Tell me, should I not communicate with these people as I'd be wasting their time? Is my input to them not valuable?
I've spoken to many people here on Slashdot in the past on topics relating to genetics, chemistry, biology, etc... some of them are credentialed...others are not. Guess what... if there's something I've learned quite well is that in a community like this... when people take an interest in something, there's a very good chance they'll not only learn it at the level that someone credentialed learned it, but often they'll take it quite a bit further as it was a personal passion of theirs.
In the past I generally demonized Bill Gates... at Microsoft and in his youth... he was an honest to goodness asshole.
In modern times, I think Bill is still an honest to goodness asshole... but rather than trying to become the richest man in the world or to topple his corporate enemies... he seems to be pretty focused on trying to make a positive difference in the world.
I would like to see a thorough interview with him clarifying his position on privacy and encryption. I'm completely against intentionally facilitating and enabling clearly unethical content such as child pornography. But (and I lack credentials, but have worked extensively in encryption), I haven't discovered a means of conditionally supporting privacy through encryption. I suppose one method could be to eventually train an ML/AI thoroughly enough that it could review content before encrypting it... but the data store it would need access to backing it could be a problem. For example, I could run the AI directly in your browser, but as it were to attempt to identify whether data should not be encrypted, it would need to search data sets for comparison. The problem with this is, while I don't mind violating the privacy of someone trying to encrypt and transmit a picture of a 16 year old child doing something
I would like to see what your requirements for "expert in the field" entails...
Would you say t
Re:Thanks Bill (Score:5, Insightful)
Thanks Bill, but your billions don't make you a virologist nor an expert in the field.
His last decade of fighting infectious diseases has made him something of an expert, and I'm sure all of the epidemiologists and virologists that his foundation employs are keeping him well-informed and saying the right things.
Let the CDC and the professionals do their job.
Bill Gates isn't the one preventing them from doing their jobs. That's a different (alleged -- I have my doubts) billionaire.
Re: Thanks Bill (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks Bill, but your billions don't make you a virologist nor an expert in the field. Let the CDC and the professionals do their job.
Fortunately he used his billions to employ actual virologists, and unlike some people he listened to them and understood them before spouting bullshit to the assembled media.
Lead by example Bill (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
What the fuck are you even babbling on about?
Re: (Score:2)
What the fuck are you even babbling on about?
Try looking it up. He was one of Epstein's buddies too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
show us fools out here in flyover country how stupid we are.
You're doing just fine by yourself. Bill Gates' help isn't needed.
Re: (Score:2)
And then what? You'd just claim it's placebo syringes.
Popcorn Time (Score:1)
Eat a dick bill (Score:3, Insightful)
"Gates also believes the government shouldn't allow encryption to hide"
What a shitheel.
Agreed. (Score:5, Insightful)
Allowing people to trade child porn or plan crimes is evil. Breaking encryption so that no online interaction can be kept private is more evil. And that's because the weak encryption will also be exploited by criminals to harm the innocent, which is the greater evil.
Encryption that can be broken by the government, but by no one else, is a logical impossibility. So, we must pick one way or the other. Either we allow criminals to conspire with each other, XOR we allow criminals to plunder innocents freely. There is no means of disallowing both.
That choice is easy. In order for the economy of the future to function, secure communication is a "necessity." So, that ends the discussion. Law enforcement can find other means of capturing criminals, and the difficulty imposed by secure encryption will just make that harder. That is the right trade-off that balances needs best.
Re: (Score:1)
Let's see, windows anal probe 10, backdoors your PC and wee willie gates the turd hates encryption, except for himself. Corporations should be allowed to encrypt, us poor shitheels, slaves should never be allowed to encrypt. Would I trust a vaccine that wee willie gates the turd touched, no fucking way, talk about BSOD.
Not a terrible idea (Score:3)
Levy: "But people aren’t getting their tests back quickly enough."
Gates: "Well, that’s just stupidity. The majority of all US tests are completely garbage, wasted. If you don’t care how late the date is and you reimburse at the same level, of course they’re going to take every customer. Because they are making ridiculous money, and it’s mostly rich people that are getting access to that. You have to have the reimbursement system pay a little bit extra for 24 hours, pay the normal fee for 48 hours, and pay nothing [if it isn’t done by then]. And they will fix it overnight."
Re: (Score:1)
"Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know."
That because he didn't know many intelligent people. One of the hallmarks of intelligence is to ask, "Why am I unhappy?" analyze the problem, find a solution.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe intelligence and happiness are mutually exclusive any more than I subscribe to the notion that ignorance always leads to bliss, but I have seen some evidence that suggests understanding more gives you more cause to worry... the naive happiness of children comes to mind.
I think it might be quite rare to find both the ability to honestly self-analyze and the willpower to implement change in a single human, regardless of intellect.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is all down to the type of intelligent people you deal with. People people who are intelligent find they can be happy walking down a suburban street enjoying the sunshine. The anal retentive, privacy invasive, often psychopathic types that gates hanged with, well, true those arseholes can never be happy and only show any ego filling self satisfaction when they are interfering in everyone else's life, they are jealous of their happiness and wish to take it away.
True experts can't get traction (Score:1)
Re:Dr Bill Gates? (Score:4, Informative)
In his defense.. he's been providing vaccines, and public health to countries for years as part of his work for the foundation.
So he probably knows more about epidemics than most people. He's also had a keen interest in influenza pandemics for years.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Appeals to authority are so sad.
Re: Dr Bill Gates? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's more to becoming an expert in a field than reading & talking (declarative knowledge). All that's just hot air without the practical application, assessment, & feedback that professionals get, plus the years of hands-on experience from working in the field (declarative & procedural knowledge).
Or to put it another way, how far would you trust Bill Gates to direct the decisions & actions of your dentist, bearing in mind that'd it'd be very difficult for the dentist to contradict him? --
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, where's his Ph.D in virology, immunology, epidemiology, or experience in the field?
Throughout his foundation. The key difference between him and some other rich fuckwits is he listens to and understands the experts he pays rather than trying to publicly shame them on twitter.
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile I'm sitting here watching everyone sterilize the crap out of everything and everybody and thinking: way to go, everyone, you're busy creating next year's untreatable Super Contagion.
If only more people could spend time in your trailer to boost their immunity.
Re:It's cute he thinks this will all be fixed by 2 (Score:5, Informative)
The kind of harsh chemicals used for disinfecting surfaces don't breed resistant pathogens. A lipid-coated virus isn't going to evolve resistance to chemicals that dissolve lipids. It's like trying to evolve Aquaman by drowning people.
The kinds of situations that evolve resistant pathogens are more complicated, usually involving improper use of antibiotics.
Robert Kennedy?!? (Score:1)
The irony is that this is a president who is a vaccine skeptic. Every meeting I have with him he is like, “Hey, I don’t know about vaccines, and you have to meet with this guy Robert Kennedy Jr. who hates vaccines and spreads crazy stuff about them.”
The guy finally finds a Democrat he likes and it's a complete loon.
His knack for choosing experts is so bad that an endorsement from him is actually a reason to doubt whomever he endorsed.
If Trump ever said "Go talk to quantaman, he's the smart
good values?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Bill Gates said:
"I like Mark [Zuckerberg], I think he's got very good values..."
That's a Donald Trump level statement right there. Zuckerberg is the antithesis of good values. I wouldn't trust Gates (the convicted monopolist), either.
Re: (Score:2)
Zuckerberg is the antithesis of good values.
Please give us a list of Zuckerberg's values, and we can address them one by one. My guess is the values you consider important and the values others consider important are different.
Re: (Score:3)
Try reading up on the Cambridge Analytica scandal, for starters. Interfering with who becomes US president - not a problem?
How about FaceBook following your activity around the Internet even while you're logged off? And their app tracks your location even when you're not using it. Spying is cool, I guess?
There's more if you're willing to look for it. Ok, your turn. Minimize, deflect, and explain it all away for me.
Re: (Score:2)
Try reading up on the Cambridge Analytica scandal, for starters. Interfering with who becomes US president - not a problem?
That depends on if you agree with the values of the chosen president now doesn't it.
How about FaceBook following your activity around the Internet even while you're logged off?
Frankly making a company based on privacy and advertisement IMO says nothing about a person other than he/she knows how to make money of an idea.
There's more if you're willing to look for it. Ok, your turn. Minimize, deflect, and explain it all away for me.
Forget my turn. I don't know the guy personally, and that is kind of the point. It seems like all you know about the man is what you read in the latest outrage rag, you have no idea what "values" Zuckerberg possesses. Now let's talk about your values, the values of a judgmental bas
Re: (Score:2)
Try reading up on the Cambridge Analytica scandal, for starters. Interfering with who becomes US president - not a problem?
That depends on if you agree with the values of the chosen president now doesn't it.
Isn't that like saying it's ok to help someone rob a bank if I think he deserves the money?
How about FaceBook following your activity around the Internet even while you're logged off?
Frankly making a company based on privacy and advertisement IMO says nothing about a person other than he/she knows how to make money of an idea.
Based on your above two statements, seems like an 'ends justify the means' kind of person.
There's more if you're willing to look for it. Ok, your turn. Minimize, deflect, and explain it all away for me.
Forget my turn. I don't know the guy personally, and that is kind of the point. It seems like all you know about the man is what you read in the latest outrage rag, you have no idea what "values" Zuckerberg possesses. Now let's talk about your values, the values of a judgmental bastard who thinks they understand someone's values based on a few news stories.
I don't know the guy personally, either, but I think you're confusing my negative comments with "mere speculation". Should I not believe that there was a hearing regarding Cambridge Analytica for just cause, and that Zuckerberg responded that he needs to "do better" to help go along with this lie? What if the universe is just a
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't that like saying it's ok to help someone rob a bank if I think he deserves the money?
No. It's like not judging someone who robed a bank without understanding the situation or his motivations. It's also about not judging a bank robber based on his single act.
Based on your above two statements, seems like an 'ends justify the means' kind of person.
OMG Advertising evil! Based on your statement I assume you think that no personal information should ever be harvested. Good luck with your future pay per view internet, given you fundamentally disagree with the economy which underpins it.
Should I not believe that there was a hearing regarding Cambridge Analytica for just cause, and that Zuckerberg responded that he needs to "do better" to help go along with this lie?
Sigh, I give up. In fact I'm just going to agree with you. You are a horrible person with horrible v
Re: (Score:2)
My point of "harvested without permission" turns into "should never be harvested".
You're right, this conversation is getting nowhere because neither of us can convey our points of view to the other without being misunderstood. You have a good day, too.
Gates is an idiot, the internet is moving on... (Score:1)
yep, the whole internet is trying to run on DOH, DOT and ESNI. If this becomes the norm there is no more snooping like windows 10 does or that china does...
Grilling Tech Executives? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Salty balsamic vinaigrette with a dash of lemon. Remember you want that flavour to enter the meat so score the skin before applying the marinade. If you did it right you'll be able to tell by listening to the sound of the meat when you add the marinade.
Grilling tech executives (Score:2)
I would think charred tech executive doesn't taste very good.
Um (Score:2)
The travel ban came too late, and it was too narrow to do anything.
Oh, so the technorati and the woke wanted swift and thorough travel bans? I somehow don't remember that.
Who is Bill Gates? (Score:1)
Who is Bill Gates? Just some old rich guy that used to lead the company with a bad reputation. Why now his opinion matter? Just because he is enormously rich? Or his predictions and visions were always right? It is enough to remember that in the middle 90s he told us that the Internet and TCP/IP are dead and NetBIOS is tye future.
Keep him out of tech stuff. (Score:2)
Let him concentrate on non-tech stuff like health issues. No wonder his MS had issues.