In the interview, he explains what he means by saying ethics is fake by essentially saying “win + clean” is just as good as “win + shady”.
The difference between clean and shady is one of normal ethics not of EA ethics.
winning as in making money
Money is worth the thing that you are intending to buy with it. It seems like he wanted to spend his largely to fund EA causes and nothing in the recent episode suggests he changed his mind on that.
The revelation that he spent maybe 10x as much on villas for his girlfriends as EA cause areas suggests he may have changed his mind on that. I don’t know why people are so quick to take the word of billionaires who “pledge” a bunch of money to EA in the future “when their market cap increases”, as the same as actually donating money.
In the interview, he explains what he means by saying ethics is fake by essentially saying “win + clean” is just as good as “win + shady”.
The difference between clean and shady is one of normal ethics not of EA ethics.
Money is worth the thing that you are intending to buy with it. It seems like he wanted to spend his largely to fund EA causes and nothing in the recent episode suggests he changed his mind on that.
Yes, but without defining winning it’s not clear that it had anything to do with EA
The revelation that he spent maybe 10x as much on villas for his girlfriends as EA cause areas suggests he may have changed his mind on that. I don’t know why people are so quick to take the word of billionaires who “pledge” a bunch of money to EA in the future “when their market cap increases”, as the same as actually donating money.
Link?
Source?