Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

"Larry Ellison has been involved with two philanthropic organizations. First he made a $300M donation to Stanford, in exchange for not admitting wrongdoing in an options backdating scandal. All other philanthropic work is to the Larry Ellison institute for prolonging of life--namely his." -- Bryan Cantrill

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc

Funny death is the equalizer for now till you get the foundation situation

Sounds like he is a refreshingly honest person

Sounds like he’s a twat.

Honest doesn't make good.

Isn't falling for virtue signalling charity donations more of a twattery?

If you choose to classify all charity donations as "virtue signaling", yes.

If you reject that absurd false framing, no.

It is always enlightening when people criticizing "virtue signaling" accidentally reveal that the problem they have is not the signaling, it's the having virtue.

It's not virtue signally if you're tangible helping people. Like if I give away food, maybe I have the intent of signalling something, but I'm also giving away food. That actually happened.

The world would be a much better place if rich people virtue signalled much more and thereby donated more.

It's amusing but it's not true. From Wikipedia:

> In 1992, Ellison shattered his elbow in a high-speed bicycle crash. After receiving treatment at University of California, Davis, Ellison donated $5 million to seed the Lawrence J. Ellison Musculo-Skeletal Research Center.

> In 1998, the Lawrence J. Ellison Ambulatory Care Center opened on the Sacramento campus of the UC Davis Medical Center

> In 2007, Ellison pledged $500,000 to fortify a community centre in Sderot, Israel, against rocket attacks

> In 2014, he donated $10 million to the Friends of the Israel Defense Forces.

> In 2017, he donated $16.6 million donation to support the construction of well-being facilities on a new campus for co-ed conscripts

> In May 2016, Ellison donated $200 million to the University of Southern California to establish a cancer research center: the Lawrence J. Ellison Institute for Transformative Medicine of USC

> Between 2021 and 2023, Ellison invested $130 million in the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change and has pledged a further $218 million since then

> in exchange for not admitting wrongdoing in an options backdating scandal

>> Refreshing honest

?

There was a time when one of the virtues was not to brag about how virtuous you were. I think that's why a lot of folks have a problem with virtue signalling. In their minds if you're signalling by doing something publicly it karmically negates what you're doing and almost alchemically turns it into something resembling vice.

I'm merely trying to explain how it is that people can have a problem with virtue signalling and to them it doesn't really contradict what is to them true virtue where you do something good and stay quiet about it.

This comment feels like it was made outside the context of the existing conversation. The comment I replied to was calling all charity virtue signaling and not just vocal giving.

But either way, I personally don’t think a library is any less valuable to a community just because it has Carnegie’s name above the entrance.

You listed multiple sociopathic stuff. A western hegemony think tank is not a good thing. Giving money to a genociders is the opposite of good.

Nobody claimed otherwise. The claim was that he gave money to nothing except his own life extension fund. And you agree that he's given money to other things.

Note that I made that claim in 2011. I had tried to research this a bit for the brief period of time that I was at Oracle, and really couldn't find anything (other than the Ellison Medical Foundation). That said, I think my essential assertion stands: given his wealth, Ellison's philanthropic work is de minimis.

Ah I see my mistake. I had noticed grandparent being about charity and was responding to that.

These numbers are rounding errors to Ellison. I give a higher percentage of my net worth every year than he has in total

Society providing incentives for rich people to give money to charitable causes is good actually. An evil person doing good things for selfish reasons is still doing good things.

It depends on your definition of "charity". If you're talking about Friends of the Israel Defense Forces, Wikipedia says:

>The organization states that it is the official U.S. charity authorized to collect donations for IDF soldiers.

>Charity evaluators have generally rated the organization favorably.[9]

>The organization is recognized as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) charity in the United States and has been tax-exempt since July 1983.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends_of_the_Israel_Defense_...

The real problem comes when you look up what charity actually does with the money.

It is hard to not get the feeling that outside of the local food bank, most charities are a type of money making scam when you dig into what they do with the money.

Would you consider a “charity” for Nazis or for an org that has killed and maimed tens upon tens of thousands of children to be a good thing or even charity?

The listed criteria for what they evaluate is not what the issue is. Did you check Charity Navigator? An org that focuses on abusing kittens will be evaluated as good by them as long as its governance is by the books.

Wikipedia regardless is not something that should be cited directly when it comes to anything remotely political.

>Would you consider a “charity” [...] an org that has killed and maimed tens upon tens of thousands of children to be a good thing or even charity?

I do not consider Planned Parenthood a good thing. However, I will still admit they are technically registered as a charity with the US government.

Friends of the Israel Defense Forces is rated 98% and 4/4 on Charity Navigator.

https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/133156445