The combined wealth at that table is… wait for it…
$485,000,000.00
That’s a few acres of parks, a library, a rehab center, a gym for underprivileged youths… with $435,000,000 left over.
These people are hilariously out of touch.
It’s crazy how we found a way to purify literal rocks into 99.9999999% pure silicon, then have magicians pull it into crystals, then etch a trillion little runes on it, put some electricity into it, and now it has 130 IQ
and the most common thing to do with this miracle is email
Crichton also wrote in a style so clear and simple that 13 year old boys (not just adults) enthusiastic about science could enjoy his books. He was probably the first author I read at that age who showed me that reading could be a source of genuine pleasure.
Any idiot can give money away, and the same amount of problems remain as before. This is midwits celebrating mediocrity.
If $26b was invested into startups that resulted in net new 1 trillion of productive capital, roughly 1 million people would have been permanently lifted out of poverty globally.
As any Soviet child can tell you, the emancipation of the proletariat can only be achieved by a massive increase of productive forces. Any spending that doesn’t result in an economic surplus destroys the capital basis that the proletariat revolution can be built.
Here's one of Michael Crichton's very finest quotes, especially applicable to climate "science":
"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science.
I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.
Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.
Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right ... In science, consensus is irrelevant."
Best to everyone,
w.
Andrew Carnegie donated $2B (in current dollars) to build 2,500 libraries. Most of these beautiful buildings still stand today, over a century later, anchoring downtowns across America.
MacKenzie Scott, on the other hand, incinerated $26B on woke NGOs with nothing to show for it. Nothing she has funded will endure a year from now, let alone 100.
It would be tragic, if it weren’t so disgustingly wasteful.
Michael Crichton is such a fascinating figure and it is a goddamn shame he died so young
This guy got into Harvard Medical School and said "actually, I want to write stories" so he wrote one of the most harrowing long short stories, the Andromeda Strain.
This guy was addicted to research. He read scientific journals for fun and researched everything that captured his interest. He was curious and skeptical. He thought hard about the implications of technology all the time.
And, instead of being a dork and writing a blog, he wrote entire novels warning about the dangers of emerging technologies. And they were great!
He wrote a `Prey` about the dangers of combining AI with nanobots 24 years ago. It's tremendous. You could publish it today and it would be relevant.
I miss him. I miss technically competent authors who can spin a good yarn while informing the reader about how technology is changing the world.
Crichton was a generational talent and we are poorer for his absence.
The average tick would die of nicotine poisoning if you smoked one cigarette before it bit you. Make sure to take a drag every few minutes on a hike. It’s for your health. You likely only have 6 months of this being effective before nicotine resistant ticks are accidentally released from the national laboratory for preventing ticks from developing nicotine resistance
@glukianoff For the benefit of a lot of people, apparently:
Heat kills more people in Europe annually than guns do in the US.
Cold kills more people than heat on every continent. Including Africa and South America.
Dear Europe (yes, even you, Glasgow!): a couple of points.
Your aversion to air conditioning is moralistic, not scientific.
Heating homes across Europe takes VASTLY more energy than cooling them. Not a little more. Orders of magnitude more. Depending on how you count it, home heating can swallow something like a hundred times the energy used for cooling.
Globally, the same basic point holds: heating is the much bigger energy burden. Cooling matters, and it will matter more as the planet warms. But pretending AC is the great sin while everyone blasts heat all winter is just silly.
I’ve watched the anti-AC theater in my mother’s home country, the UK, and it has all the earmarks of a devotional self-flagellation ritual: less environmental science than a belief in the nobility of suffering.
Also: heat pumps exist. They cool your home in the summer and heat it in the winter, using far less energy than traditional heating.
For American people who do not understand Britain and Europe's attitude to aircon.
1) Air con has been made deliberately expensive via inefficent energy policy for decades.
2) In the UK, they have not updated the electricity grid. So if there was a huge uptake in aircon it would allegedly put strain on the grid. So the powers that be do everything in their power to not have mass installation of air con.
3) Brits, especially in the north of England, have this peculiar attitude that just because its hot for a few days, maybe 2 weeks max, that the price to pay for air con installation or even a couple of portable units, is not worth it.
4) So they boil to death.
U.S. taxpayer money, funneled through USAID and NIH, funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. That research likely caused the COVID pandemic that killed millions and cost trillions.
Dr. Fauci personally signed off on these experiments, then lied to Congress about it.