[AI] offtopic but good

pamnani pamnani at vsnl.com
Sun Jul 8 21:59:37 EDT 2007


Friends, I am forwarding this mail knowing full well that it is offtopic but also knowing that it is good.
For those who think I should have not sent it please shout at me privately and complain to the moderator off the list. I apolagise in advance.   
Those who want to thank me please dont bother  you are always welcome but if you still insist then send me a personal mail. 
Do not under any circumstances add to the traffic on the list for silly reasons. 
Kanchan   



Speech at Harvard by Bill Gates

Microsoft chairman Bill Gates delivers the Commencement address at
Harvard University in
Cambridge, Massachusetts.

June 8, 2007 - 12:36PM
         

President Bok, former President Rudenstine,incoming President Faust,
members of the Harvard
Corporation and the Board of Overseers, members of the faculty, parents,
and especially, the graduates:

I've been waiting more than 30 years to say this: "Dad, I always told
you I'd come back and get my degree."

I want to thank Harvard for this timely honour. I'll be changing my job
next year ... and it will be nice to finally have a college degree on my
resume.

I applaud the graduates today for taking a much more direct route to
your degrees. For my part,
I'm just happy that the Crimson has called me"Harvard's most successful
dropout." I guess that
makes me valedictorian of my own special class ... I did the best of
everyone who failed.

But I also want to be recognised as the guy who got Steve Ballmer to
drop out of business school. I'm a bad influence. That's why I was
invited to speak at your graduation. If I had spoken at your
orientation, fewer of you might be here today.

Harvard was just a phenomenal experience for me. Academic life was
fascinating. I used to sit in on lots of classes I hadn't even signed up
for. And dorm life was terrific. I lived up at Radcliffe, in Currier
House. There were always lots of people in my dorm room late at night
discussing things, because everyone knew I didn't worry about getting up
in the morning.That's how I came to be the leader of the anti-social
group. We clung to each other as a way of validating our rejection of
all those social people.

Radcliffe was a great place to live. There were more women up there, and
most of the guys were science-math types. That combination offered me
the best odds, if you know what I mean. This is where I learned the sad
lesson that improving your odds doesn't guarantee success.

One of my biggest memories of Harvard came in January 1975, when I made
a call from Currier House to a company in Albuquerque that had begun
making the world's first personal computers. I offered to sell them
software.

I worried that they would realise I was just a student in a dorm and
hang up on me. Instead they
said: "We're not quite ready, come see us in a month,"which was a good
thing, because we hadn't written the software yet. From that moment, I
worked day and night on this little extra credit project that marked the
end of my college education and the beginning of a remarkable journey
with Microsoft.

What I remember above all about Harvard was being in the midst of so
much energy and intelligence. It could be exhilarating, intimidating,
sometimes even discouraging, but always challenging. It was an amazing
privilege - and though I left early, I was transformed by my years at
Harvard, the friendships I made, and the ideas I worked on.

But taking a serious look back ... I do have one big regret.

I left Harvard with no real awareness of the awful inequities in the
world - the appalling disparities of health, and wealth, and opportunity
that condemn millions of people to lives of despair.

I learned a lot here at Harvard about new ideas in economics and
politics. I got great exposure
to the advances being made in the sciences.

But humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries - but in how
those discoveries are
applied to reduce inequity. Whether through democracy,strong public
education, quality health care, or broad economic opportunity - reducing
inequity is the highest human achievement.

I left campus knowing little about the millions of young people cheated
out of educational
opportunities here in this country. And I knew nothing about the
millions of people living in unspeakable poverty and disease in
developing countries.

It took me decades to find out.

You graduates came to Harvard at a different time. You know more about
the world's inequities than the classes that came before. In your years
here, I hope you've had a chance to think about how - in this age of
accelerating technology - we can finally take on these inequities, and
we can solve them.

Imagine, just for the sake of discussion, that you had a few hours a
week and a few dollars a month to donate to a cause - and you wanted to
spend that time and money where it would have the greatest impact in
saving and improving lives. Where would you spend it?

For Melinda and for me, the challenge is the same: how can we do the
most good for the greatest number with the resources we have.

During our discussions on this question,Melinda and I read an article
about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor
countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless in this
country. Measles, malaria, pneumonia, hepatitis B, yellow fever. One
disease I had never even heard of, rotavirus, was killing half a million
kids each year - none of them in the United States.

We were shocked. We had just assumed that if millions of children were
dying and they could be
saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the
medicines to save them. But it did not. For under a dollar, there were
interventions that could save lives that just weren't being delivered.

If you believe that every life has equal value, it's revolting to learn
that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are not. We said to
ourselves: "This can't be true. But if it is true, it
deserves to be the priority of our giving."

So we began our work in the same way anyone here would begin it. We
asked: "How could the world let these children die?"

The answer is simple, and harsh. The market did not reward saving the
lives of these children, and governments did not subsidise it. So the
children died because their mothers and their fathers had no power in
the market and no voice in the system.

But you and I have both.

We can make market forces work better for the poor if we can develop a
more creative

capitalism - if we can stretch the reach of market forces so that more
people can make a profit, or at least make a living, serving people who
are suffering from the worst inequities. We also can press governments
around the world to spend taxpayer money in ways that better reflect the
values of the people who pay the taxes.

If we can find approaches that meet the needs of the poor in ways that
generate profits for business and votes for politicians, we will have
found a sustainable way to reduce inequity in the world. This task is
open-ended. It can never be finished. But a conscious effort to answer
this challenge will change the world.

I am optimistic that we can do this, but I talk to skeptics who claim
there is no hope. They say:
"Inequity has been with us since the beginning, and will be with us till
the end - because people just ...don't ... care." I completely disagree.

I believe we have more caring than we know what to do with.

All of us here in this Yard, at one time or another, have seen human
tragedies that broke our
hearts, and yet we did nothing - not because we didn't care, but because
we didn't know what to do. If we had known how to help, we would have
acted.

The barrier to change is not too little caring; it is too much
complexity.

To turn caring into action, we need to see a problem, see a solution,
and see the impact. But
complexity blocks all three steps.

Even with the advent of the Internet and 24-hour news, it is still a
complex enterprise to get
people to truly see the problems. When an airplane crashes, officials
immediately call a press
conference. They promise to investigate, determine the cause, and
prevent similar crashes in the future.

But if the officials were brutally honest, they would say: "Of all the
people in the world who
died today from preventable causes, one half of one percent of them were
on this plane. We're determined to do everything possible to solve the
problem that took the lives of the one half of one percent."

The bigger problem is not the plane crash, but the millions of
preventable deaths.

We don't read much about these deaths. The media covers what's new - and
millions of people dying is nothing new. So it stays in the background,
where it's easier to ignore. But even when we do see it or read about
it, it's difficult to keep our eyes on the problem. It's hard to look at
suffering if the situation is so complex that we don't know how to help.
And so we look away.

If we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we come to the
second step: cutting
through the complexity to find a solution.

Finding solutions is essential if we want to make the most of our
caring. If we have clear and
proven answers anytime an organization or individual asks "How can I
help?," then we can get action - and we can make sure that none of the
caring in the world is wasted. But complexity makes it hard to mark a
path of action for everyone who cares - and that makes it hard for their
caring to matter.

Cutting through complexity to find a solution runs through four
predictable stages: determine a
goal, find the highest-leverage approach, discover the ideal technology
for that approach, and in the meantime, make the smartest application of
the technology that you already have - whether it's something
sophisticated, like a drug, or something simpler, like a bed net.

The AIDS epidemic offers an example. The broad goal, of course, is to
end the disease. The highest-leverage approach is prevention. The ideal
technology would be a vaccine that gives lifetime immunity with a single
dose. So governments, drug companies, and foundations fund vaccine
research. But their work is likely to take more than a decade, so in the
meantime, we have to work with what we have in hand - and the best
prevention approach we have now is
getting people to avoid risky behaviour.

Pursuing that goal starts the four-step cycle again. This is the
pattern. The crucial thing is to
never stop thinking and working - and never do what we did with malaria
and tuberculosis in the 20th century- which is to surrender to
complexity and quit.

The final step - after seeing the problem and finding an approach - is
to measure the impact of your work and share your successes and failures
so that others learn from your efforts.

You have to have the statistics, of course.You have to be able to show
that a program is
vaccinating millions more children. You have to be able to show a
decline in the number of children dying from these diseases. This is
essential not just to improve the program, but also to help draw more
investment from business and government.

But if you want to inspire people to participate, you have to show more
than numbers; you
have to convey the human impact of the work - so people can feel what
saving a life means to the families affected.

I remember going to Davos some years back and sitting on a global health
panel that was discussing ways to save millions of lives. Millions!
Think of the thrill of saving just one person's life - then multiply
that by millions. ... Yet this was the most boring panel I've ever been
on - ever. So boring even I couldn't bear it.

What made that experience especially striking was that I had just come
from an event where we were introducing version 13 of some piece of
software, and we had people jumping and shouting with excitement. I love
getting people excited about software - but why can't we generate even
more excitement for saving lives?

You can't get people excited unless you can help them see and feel the
impact. And how you do that- is a complex question.

Still, I'm optimistic. Yes, inequity has been with us forever, but the
new tools we have to cut through complexity have not been with us
forever. They are new - they can help us make the most of our caring-
and that's why the future can be different from the past.

The defining and ongoing innovations of this age - biotechnology, the
computer, the Internet - give us a chance we've never had before to end
extreme poverty and end death from preventable disease.

Sixty years ago, George Marshall came to this commencement and announced
a plan to assist the
nations of post-war Europe. He said: "I think one difficulty is that the
problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts
presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult
for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the
situation. It is virtually impossible at this distance to grasp at all
the real significance of the situation."

Thirty years after Marshall made his address,as my class graduated
without me, technology was
emerging that would make the world smaller, more open,more visible, less
distant.

The emergence of low-cost personal computers gave rise to a powerful
network that has transformed opportunities for learning and
communicating.

The magical thing about this network is not just that it collapses
distance and makes everyone
your neighbor. It also dramatically increases the number of brilliant
minds we can have working together on the same problem - and that scales
up the rate of innovation to a staggering degree.

At the same time, for every person in the world who has access to this
technology, five people
don't. That means many creative minds are left out of this discussion --
smart people with practical intelligence and relevant experience who
don't have the technology to hone their talents or contribute their
ideas to the world.

We need as many people as possible to have access to this technology,
because these advances are triggering a revolution in what human beings
can do for one another. They are making it possible not just for
national governments, but for universities,corporations, smaller
organisation, and even individuals to see problems, see approaches, and
measure the impact of their efforts to address the hunger, poverty, and
desperation George Marshall spoke of 60 years ago.

Members of the Harvard Family: Here in the Yard is one of the great
collections of intellectual
talent in the world.

What for?

There is no question that the faculty, the alumni, the students, and the
benefactors of Harvard
have used their power to improve the lives of people here and around the
world. But can we do more? Can Harvard dedicate its intellect to
improving the lives of people who will never even hear its name?

Let me make a request of the deans and the professors - the intellectual
leaders here at Harvard:
As you hire new faculty, award tenure, review curriculum, and determine
degree requirements, please ask yourselves:

Should our best minds be dedicated to solving our biggest problems?

Should Harvard encourage its faculty to take on the world's worst
inequities? Should Harvard
students learn about the depth of global poverty ...the prevalence of
world hunger ... the scarcity of clean water ...the girls kept out of
school ... the children who die from diseases we can cure?

Should the world's most privileged people learn about the lives of the
world's least privileged?

These are not rhetorical questions - you will answer with your policies.

My mother, who was filled with pride the day I was admitted here - never
stopped pressing me to do more for others. A few days before my wedding,
she hosted a bridal event, at which she read aloud a letter about
marriage that she had written to Melinda. My mother was very ill with
cancer at the time, but she saw one more opportunity to deliver her
message, and at the close of the letter she said: "From those to whom
much is given, much is expected."

When you consider what those of us here in this Yard have been given -
in talent, privilege, and
opportunity - there is almost no limit to what the world has a right to
expect from us.

In line with the promise of this age, I want to exhort each of the
graduates here to take on an
issue - a complex problem, a deep inequity, and become a specialist on
it. If you make it the focus of your career, that would be phenomenal.
But you don't have to do that to make an impact. For a few hours every
week, you can use the growing power of the Internet to get informed,
find others with the same interests, see the barriers, and find ways to
cut through them.

Don't let complexity stop you. Be activists.Take on the big inequities.
It will be one of the
great experiences of your lives.

You graduates are coming of age in an amazing time. As you leave
Harvard, you have technology that members of my class never had. You
have awareness of global inequity, which we did not have. And with that
awareness, you likely also have an informed conscience that will torment
you if you abandon these people whose lives you could change with very
little effort.You have more than we had; you must start sooner, and
carry on longer.

Knowing what you know, how could you not?

And I hope you will come back here to Harvard 30 years from now and
reflect on what you have done with your talent and your energy. I hope
you will judge yourselves not on your professional
accomplishments alone, but also on how well you have addressed the
world's deepest inequities ... on how well you treated people a world
away who have nothing in common with you but their humanity.

Good luck.






More information about the AccessIndia mailing list