[csallen]

So you're evil if you make a tool that "can enable" other people to do evil stuff. I guess most software developers are evil. Anyone who makes silverware is evil. Etc.

As I already pointed out above, your bar is going to be incredibly unrealistically low for what counts as evil, and I was right.

You're also just ignoring most of the people on my list anyway, picking on one person (quite poorly), and then trying to generalize that to all billionaires.

[callmeal]

About the only "ethical" billionaires (did not exploiting anyone) would be the ones at the end of your list. That would be Taylor Swift, Beyonce, J. K. Rowling, Roger Federer (and no George Lucas is not on that list).

> I guess most software developers are evil.

Not most. Anyone who willingly works for Facebook/Instagram/Tiktok/Advertising/Palantir and other exploitative companies is.

>Anyone who makes silverware is evil. Etc.

Umm, silverware?

>picking on one person (quite poorly), and then trying to generalize that to all billionaires.

Yeah that was my bad - to clarify: anyone who became a billionaire through their own work/talent and without exploiting anyone is an ethical one in my book. Anyone who became one by stealing (yes, "upcoding" medical charges is stealing, unpaid labor is stealing) is not.

[csallen]

What's your definition of exploiting someone?

What's your definition of "through their own work/talent"?

What's your evidence that somehow up-coding medical charges was some crucial part of what led to Epic's initial success?