I totally agree with the sentiment of this comment (though I'm not sure how much marketing is involved.) Prince was very good at music and was, well, kind of a dick. I don't quite get the massive outpouring of grief that has ensued.
Well, I wasn't really responding to the Bill Gates part in particular. Gates was a bit of a megalomaniac with MS. But he's doing awesome stuff with the money now. As person I'm not aware of him ever being a jerk.
So if you gain lots of money via semi nefarious means what fraction do you have to dedicate to good works before the earlier wrong is cancelled?
I know that he didn't gas 6 million people but letting people buy their way out of moral debt with a fraction of the money they gained still seems horribly repugnant.
First, what moral debt? Second, I imagine the sum total of his humanitarian efforts are greater than the total charity if all of those dollars remained in the pockets of each person who bought windows 95 et al. So repugnant seems like a real stretch.
