> I dont know

Well good thing you started with that since you are clearly not familiar with him at all. He is very very well read and highly involved with the charity.

> but he fucked america first

I dunno: He played a crucial role in a long-term, industry-wide collaboration that resulted in practically every household having at least one computer. And for years he's been devoting his fortune and his intellect to solving global-scale problems. That has gotta be worth some redemptive value for past sins, yes?

His fight against disease certainly does a lot to redeem him in my eyes. I was never a fan of him in his Microsoft days, and I'm still not a fan of Microsoft or their products, though they stand out less today because the other Big Tech companies are just as bad in various ways. Remember when we all loved Google and Apple? Windows is still terrible, though, and not fulfilling the promise of what should be possible with computers.

I also remember how we laughed when his Encarta encyclopedia tried to sell Bill Gates as widely known as a philanthropist. It wasn't true then, but it is true now. He certainly deserves that credit.

It's as if the entirety of computing would be better off today if Microsoft had been broken up back in 2001, and the world wasn't forced to suffer through decades of windows stagnation.

People are simple and need a single figure to worship. Gates is an example of that.

This is a nit, and should not be taken as engaging with the substance of your comment, positively or negatively:

"Antitrust" are the laws designed to break up monopolistic "trusts". So far as I am aware, Bill Gates only ever had costs from any antitrust operation, legal or illegal.

I mean, it's pretty hard to argue it isn't his property at this point.

And overall, he stole from the rich and is giving to the poor.