Read on Twitter
I would like you to consider the proposition that Bill Gates is an amateur - in everything he does! It& #39;s a different perspective, but I know it to be true. For this "crisis" he unilaterally proposed actions that are diametrically opposite to decades of thinking on epidemiology,
This is the same as he did in IT. He ignored all the good work that had gone before on OSes like Unix and, to this day, Windows still suffers from poor security, lousy networking, poor storage structures, poor interoperability with other OSes, huge code overheads, bad memory ...
management and a client/server structure that has never been right. He started working on all these problems from scratch and, because he didn& #39;t do the background reading, came up with dreadful solutions. He didn& #39;t write DOS himself, so didn& #39;t even have that experience to call on
Sure, he was well funded but, like so many of these elite projects - which we can now see as being essentially the framework of a control grid - the work was amateurish and lacked art, finesse, or any spark of inspiration. It was bludgeoned onto the public by being all there was.
Gates& #39;s monopolistic drive got the money in but the products were a hotch-potch of things that had either been bought or had been copied; often after driving other firms out of business. Excel, a copy of Lotus 123, Access, a bought in (I think) database that he failed to improve
and who remembers Novell Networks? Well, that was subsumed by the Windows ecosystem (under questionable circumstances) and seems not to ever have been improved. Like with so many companies that were hoovered up by the Microsoft monolith, the sole aim was to eliminate competition.
These aren& #39;t the actions of a genius, nor of someone who even takes pride in their work. I, for one, doubt the pretence of him having an IQ of 160. This was a power trip, which has now truly gone to his head - believing, as he does, all the propaganda written about him.
It is notable, from the perspective of his ego, that when he stepped down from being CEO of Microsoft he gave himself the new title of Chief Software Architect. This is the one thing that he cannot do, as we have seen from the entire history of the company, and i would say that
he doesn& #39;t have the mental capacity to encompass even a single piece of software of normal complexity. But his ego says he does, and the title tells you he wants you to think he does. We should think about his personality flaws, and this one shows deep intellectual insecurity.
Which is how he should feel, given that he has been hailed a genius when his IQ is probably only in the mid to high 120s. We have been fooled before - and especially in the tech era - by social inadequacies, personality problems and eccentricities being equated to high intellect.
These problems can exist independently of intellect, and with Gates we now see them with frightening clarity, because they dominate his drives. These drives have now assumed a terrifying scale. The urge to get those around you to see things as you do has grown to wanting the
whole world to conform to his vision. This is a childish trait that most of us threw off in our twenties or earlier. But Gates wants to see "essentially the whole world" vaccinated and using his monitoring software. He has usurped everyone in the field of epidemiology in order
to impose his vision on the world. We should not just note the control-freakery involved in this, but also that it is likely that this vision is informed by eugenicist tendencies that we have already seen, and which may have been inherited from his father& #39;s outlook and interests
So, if Gates is indeed an amateur, is far from being a genius, and the record of Microsoft is actually one of mediocrity, then should we be listening to him on any subject? Should we not be wary of his personality and disposition? And why elevate his views above those of experts?
