Your point about poverty and corruption defeating cures and treatments is valid, but is perhaps not entirely applicable to Ebola and Marburg. Both of these viruses are zoonoses, that is, they are transmitted to humans from other animals. We do not know for certain which animals are the natural reservoirs of Filoviruses (Ebola and Marburg are the two genera of the Filoviridae), but an incident in the Philippines in 2009 where Ebola infected swine illustrates that cosmopolitan animals (like pigs) can carry the virus. Furthermore, we know that a wide swathe of mammals (from rodents to bats to marsupials) carry 'fossil' Filovirus genetic material in their genomes, meaning that at least their ancestors were carriers of these viruses. Still further, Ebola and Marburg are part of the order Mononegavirales. This order contains the viruses that cause rabies, measles, mumps, and Newcastle disease (a really nasty scourge of domestic and wild birds). It's certainly possible that this treatment, as it undergoes further development, could be applied to related diseases. Sanitation and vaccination rendered rabies, measles, and mumps more or less non-issues in the developed world decades ago, but the current treatment for, say, rabies (if you contract it) is extremely dangerous and not particularly effective.

Loads of disposable income because of student loans. No concept of value because they've never had a real job. No desire to be the kid with the Dell when everyone else has a shiny Mac, including the elitist effete instructor. Sounds like the perfect market for Apple!

Precisely. The journalist who wrote this article does not understand the difference between population census (gross size) & effective population size. 70,000 years ago, the scope of genetic variation of humans - who have living descendants today - was contained in approximately 2,000 individuals. It's a more sophisticated idea, but it's also a far cry from the more sensationalist 'only 2,000 people survived'. To put this idea into a modern perspective, there are over 6,500,000,000 people alive on the planet today, but our species' effective population size is only about 10,000. If human populations 70,000 years ago had the same amount of diversity as we do today, then there were about 1,300,000,000 people alive 70,000 years ago. Obviously this is an absurdly high figure; we know from historic records that there were not more than a billion people alive as recently as 1800. What it does imply, however, is that our species, over the course of the last 70,000 years, has become more genetically homogeneous. This can only be explained by gene flow & natural selection. Recent work by Greg Cochran & John Hawks has shown that adaptive evolution has been accelerating rapidly over the last 40,000 years; our comparatively low Fst value (a measure of population differences) indicates gene flow between regions has also been increasing.