netbuzz writes "Dilbert's Scott Adams kicked off the idea in his November 19th blog post, saying there isn't anything wrong with this country that President Bill Gates couldn't cure in less time than it takes to get a new operating system out the door. Today, the idea is moving forward with a brand-new 'Bill Gates for President' Web site. Adams is also back on the campaign trail, flogging the site and Gates' candidacy." A blog post at Network World includes a lot of eye-rolling about this idea, but neither Adams nor the folks at the 'Gates for President' website seem to be taking this lightly.
Hmmm...I seem to remember that Bill say that he was going to be stepping down as Microsoft CEO in a couple of years...right about when the 2008 Presidential campaign would be heating up.
Microsoft decided to get into the console gaming arena without any prior experience. Perhaps Bill is thinking this same thing with politics. After all, Arnold Schwatzenegger and Jesse Ventura both won state governorships primarily on name recognition. And as much as I despise is company's tactics, he is quite intelligent and has real management skills.
While I can't say I love the idea, I'd probably rather have Bill as President than most of the people who run.
I was thinking this too. How sad that one of the most reviled of businessmen is actually attractive compared to so much of the other options when it comes to President.
How sad that one of the most reviled of businessmen is actually attractive compared to so much of the other options when it comes to President.
reviled by the Geek, perhaps. but not by TIME magazine. and not by the population generally. which has never shared the Geek's hatred of Microsoft.
a poster the other day had the right idea when he wrote that the Borg icon for Gates was a desperately lame and tired old joke that has no resonance beyond Slashdot.
reviled by the Geek, perhaps. but not by TIME magazine. and not by the population generally. which has never shared the Geek's hatred of Microsoft.
All that shows is Gates' ability to retain a competent PR firm to groom his image in such a way that his misanthropic tendencies, dubious business practices, and outdated technical expertise are hidden behind the gloss of a $50 billion net worth. In a land of "Who wants to be a millionaire", most of the shallow end of the gene pool can't be bothered with actually analyzing the skills and merits (or lack thereof) of their political candidates.
This story is one of the biggest meta-trolls posted in Slashdot history. Honestly, what qualifies a newspaper cartoonist to advocate the political candidacy of one of the least qualified personalities imaginable other than the possible humor value when he laughs about it with friends a year from now?
Successful? Absolutely. Ethical? Not a bit. Everything Microsoft did in order to gain its "successful" position has been completely ethically bankrupt--unfair competition, shady deals, outright theft (see Stac), the list goes on and on.
Is Bill smart? Certainly. Probably not that much technically (as is often said, what has he done himself since the Altair days?), but businesswise he's probably better than the very best Mafia dons in being able to barely skirt the law and use every dirty trick he can invent in making his business more successful, no matter who it hurts.
But the question is, do you really want someone smart, in a criminal way, to run the country? I certainly don't.
However, it seems we keep electing criminals to office anyway (Bush, Delay, etc.), and our current criminal president is utterly incompetent, so maybe we'd do better with a smart criminal like Bill...
A criminally smart President doesn't mean a criminal President. It would be a good thing, as long as he could be kept in check. Think about security companies who hire top-notch crackers as consultants. It's because of their criminal (aka street?) smarts. Smart is smart, regardless of the subject.
I'm in an odd position. I respect Bill gates for his achievements, but dislike Microsoft as it stands (and cannot beleive Ballmer is in chanrge, wtf's up with that?). Barely anyone remembers that Microsoft were once the good guys saving us from the evils of IBM and Unix (back when unix was a million flavors, and they were all damn expensive, before the wonder that is Linux).
Bill is a shark. If he took his business abilities, which are somewhat fearsome, and turned them to politics, then interesting things could result. Look what happened when he turned to Charity, the biggest infusion of private funds into charitable works *in* *history*.
However, is that really what America needs? I don't think so, not right now. Incidentally England was run by businessmen in the 18th and 19th century. The empire wasn't about glory, it was about profit. We did rather well out of it, even though people try and pretend that england was some kind of holy democracy. Remember the Suiz Canal Crisis? Think the motivation was political? Hell no, it was pure business reasoning. Ok it went badly for us, but that was because the climate had changed. The same reasoning had made us the most powerful nation on the planet, but its time had passed.
The fact is that at certain points in history, businessmen have been the right people to run things.
Remember that War of independence you had? Who were the initial group that started it all. Politicians? Nope, Businessmen....
Who were the people who did the most to ensure America's technological dominance and ultimate victory in WWII? Businessmen. When politicians make war armaments decisions entirely you get bad decisions, History showed this clearly. For example, the UK's war spending and research was almost entirely government controlled. That's why we rejected the Jet until the war was almost over. Would a businessman have done that? Oh hell no.
Bush has showed us that ruthless determination isn't such a great trait in a president.
Gates would make a horrible president because the country is not run like a dictatorship like all companies are. At MS he was the dictator, what he said went and anybody who questioned him could be canned. As a president you have to work with the congress. Bush had a compliant congress who were sycophantic to an obscene degree but even then he failed miserably in just about everything he tried.
Gates is not used to compromising, he is not used to being disagreed with. He would make a horrible president.
Geez... if people thought Dick Cheney was cold and ruthless, wait until they have Bill Gates in charge. Plus, imagine some of the innovations we'd see:
Pres Gates Day 1: The U.S. needs to become the most innovative country in the world, so I have decided in interest of attaining this goal we will rebuild Washington D.C.... the new city will be named Capitol 2.0
Pres Gates Day 365: The Capital 2.0 is running ahead of schedule, I know it's been tough living and working out of trailers, but we should be finished within a year
Pres Gates Day 700: Due to the new competition from Tokyo's rebuilding operations, we have decided to restart our Capitol 2.0 project, but the delay will be worth it since our new Capitol will be even better than the original one planned
Pres Gates Day 1000: We have found that the Capitol 2.0 subway system was incompatible with the Capitol 2.0 sewage system, so we will rebuild DC's old subway system and try to make it work within the Capitol 2.0 structure
Pres Gates on his last day: On my final day in office, I am proud to unveil Capitol 2.0... at first you may think it looks just like DC, but we actually repainted all the buildings, and added innovative new parking meters that destroy your car if you try to park in same parking spot more than 3 times.
Everything in DC outside of the actual Federal Buildings should rightly go back to Maryland (just like Alexandria and Arlington went back to Virginia around 1840). Of course, even Maryland is too smart to agree to that.
"there isn't anything wrong with this country that President Bill Gates couldn't cure in less time than it takes to get a new operating system out the door"
If I were going to vote for a Super Rich Guy President, Warren Buffett might deserve a look. I've seen/read a few interviews, and was fairly impressed.
A point he made once that was worth remembering (paraphrasing a bit)...
Imagine that you're still unborn, in the womb, and are given the opportunity to choose the kind of world in which you'll be living after you're born. The only catch is that you can't know the circumstances of your birth - rich/poor, black/white, European/Somalian, healthy/sick, etc. Now, what kind of world do you choose when you have no idea where you'll fit into it? Buffett said that's the world you should be striving for.
President Gates was quoted as saying regarding the MicroSoft investigation, "Justice Department investigation? What Justice Department investigation?" MicroSoft stock prices climbed 200 points today when Wall Street heard the news.
In related news, Steve Job's execution as a Enemy of the State is scheduled to go on as planned at 9pm EST. Live, pay-per-view coverage can be found on MSNBC.com.
My calendar is about to say December 1, not April 1. This is really dumb. I don't bash Bill Gates a lot. I admire him in some ways. But come on, who wants a president whose company has been conviceted of being an illegal monopoly, that has been found gulty of being a predator, that has stifled innovation while claiming the opposite, that has run roughshod over consumer rights and then tried to weasel out of every penalty anyone ever tried to impose on it?
1. He wants to buy an old Cesna, paintit flashy colors, and call it Air Force '95. 2. He heard that some government agencies were using UNIX. 3. He wants to get that illegal sports car in SF Bay into the US. 4. He just thinks it would be neat to be president of two big thingies. 5. He's hot for Janet Reno. 6. His ego needs to be inflated. 7. He lost the key to his mansion, so he needs a new place to live. 8. He thinks that he can use MS Money to balance the budget. 9. He feels that Perot just didn't throw enough money at it. 10. He wants to make Windows '95 the official operating system of the USA.
Ok, those look kind of dated...but still funny
On the serious side, I wonder how many people with the power to see into the mysterious future, were tempted to e-mail the editor about a SERIOUS problem with this story!
For innumerous jokes about constantly having to reboot the government. And the need for constant government upgrades.
Let's forget open-source software for any public activities.
Er...uh...*cowers*
On the flip side, special interest groups declare bankruptancy. Groups claim they became ineffective because when ever they tried to buy Bill Gates he declined expressing that he already had enough headaches trying to spend the billions he already has.
My main objection to a Gates presidency is that Bill can do far more good for the world as the head of a well-funded private foundation than he could possibly do as master of ceremonies and chief law enforcement officer of the United States. Now that he's stepping down as Borg Queen, he has an unprecedented opportunity to improve the quality of living for so much of the human population... why waste a man like that on a job where he'll have to negotiate with Congress, waste time overseeing dozens of secretaries, etc.
A politician with the honesty of Bill Clinton, the dashing presence of Michael Dukakis, the sexy charisma of Hubert Humphrey, the commanding stature of Joseph Lieberman, the popularity of Gray Davis, the humble background of John D. Rockefeller, the down-home charm of John Kerry, the electoral experience of Pat Robertson, the honesty of Dan Rostenkowski, and the huge following of Dennis Kucinich!
If you let it be too efficient, then they do things like round up all the gays, communists, jews, and anyone else they dislike and throw them in jail.
One of the major reasons the US is so sucessfull is that it created multiple layers of bureaucracy (Senate, House, Executive Branch, Legal system, State governments, etc.) instead of making one thing that just works well.
Fast governments do things without thinking, ignoring the wisdom of "hey, maybe we ought to stop and think about it before we make abortion illegal", and just go ahead and passes laws that people think they want when they are scared and terrified, instead of thinking long and hard about the long term consequences of it.
Good government is reasonable and thinks and debates until it's time to do something, then goes out and does it. "Inefficiency" and "Debate" are two completely different things, and equating them is like equating "debating the war in Iraq" with "not supporting our troops..." They are two completely different things that look somewhat alike to the unaware observer. I guess the real problem with our government is the people it has come to represent. Let me put it this way:
The seventh most visited site in the US is run by less than 50 people.
If that isn't a small number of people doing something beneficial for an extremely large number, I don't know what is. That's what I want out of government - run the water, run the electricity, run the courts system so it's fair, provide a social safety net, create an armed force that can defend our interests at home as effectively as necessary as cheaply as possible, push the economy to a high rate of growth, etc. And do it with as small a portion of the population and the population's resources as possible. The way our government is run now is completely purpose-less and the majority of it is done out of either sheer habit or the self-interest of politicians.
Bill Gates for President? I'm a Microsoft employee, and even I don't think that's a good idea.
Why not? Well, Billg is a very smart guy, he's extremely intense, extremely intelligent - can pick out and remember the smallest details from specs that are hundreds of pages long - and has generally been a pretty good leader for Microsoft. Not many people can make the transition from running a small business with 3 employees to having that business become the biggest software company in the world, with over 60,000 employees. He did, and he did it well. He's got real talent.
However, Microsoft is also a frigging bureaucratic mess of unbelievable proportions. A lot of you have probalby read that Joel on Software article about the shutdown menu in Vista, and the dev's response to it in which he describes a year-long process of weekly meetings mostly spent arguing over design features. The thing is, the whole company is like that. While I'm pretty sure Billg is a nice guy (I don't know him pesonally, but it's my impression) and he's very smart and I'm sure he has far more integrity than most politicians, I don't really want to put anyone who oversaw the creation of such a bureaucracy in charge of the government. After all, it took government far longer to evolve such a horrid bureacracy, Microsoft did it in only 30 years, and most of that happened in the last 20.
So, while I have tremendous respect for Billg for his accomplishments at Microsoft, and also for Linus Torvalds and Steve Jobs for their accomplishments, I wouldn't like to see any of them become president of the United States, thank you very much (not that Linus could, because of the stricture on being a citizen by birth, of course).
Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmmm...I seem to remember that Bill say that he was going to be stepping down as Microsoft CEO in a couple of years...right about when the 2008 Presidential campaign would be heating up.
Microsoft decided to get into the console gaming arena without any prior experience. Perhaps Bill is thinking this same thing with politics. After all, Arnold Schwatzenegger and Jesse Ventura both won state governorships primarily on name recognition. And as much as I despise is company's tactics, he is quite intelligent and has real management skills.
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
You must have heard that a couple of years ago.
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
I'd rather vote for Jack Thomps... wait, what the fuck am I saying?!! *shoots self*
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
I was thinking this too. How sad that one of the most reviled of businessmen is actually attractive compared to so much of the other options when it comes to President.
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
reviled by the Geek, perhaps. but not by TIME magazine. and not by the population generally. which has never shared the Geek's hatred of Microsoft.
a poster the other day had the right idea when he wrote that the Borg icon for Gates was a desperately lame and tired old joke that has no resonance beyond Slashdot.
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Insightful)
All that shows is Gates' ability to retain a competent PR firm to groom his image in such a way that his misanthropic tendencies, dubious business practices, and outdated technical expertise are hidden behind the gloss of a $50 billion net worth. In a land of "Who wants to be a millionaire", most of the shallow end of the gene pool can't be bothered with actually analyzing the skills and merits (or lack thereof) of their political candidates.
This story is one of the biggest meta-trolls posted in Slashdot history. Honestly, what qualifies a newspaper cartoonist to advocate the political candidacy of one of the least qualified personalities imaginable other than the possible humor value when he laughs about it with friends a year from now?
Parent
Re:Uh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Is Bill smart? Certainly. Probably not that much technically (as is often said, what has he done himself since the Altair days?), but businesswise he's probably better than the very best Mafia dons in being able to barely skirt the law and use every dirty trick he can invent in making his business more successful, no matter who it hurts.
But the question is, do you really want someone smart, in a criminal way, to run the country? I certainly don't.
However, it seems we keep electing criminals to office anyway (Bush, Delay, etc.), and our current criminal president is utterly incompetent, so maybe we'd do better with a smart criminal like Bill...
Parent
Re:Uh... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Uh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Bill is a shark. If he took his business abilities, which are somewhat fearsome, and turned them to politics, then interesting things could result. Look what happened when he turned to Charity, the biggest infusion of private funds into charitable works *in* *history*.
However, is that really what America needs? I don't think so, not right now. Incidentally England was run by businessmen in the 18th and 19th century. The empire wasn't about glory, it was about profit. We did rather well out of it, even though people try and pretend that england was some kind of holy democracy. Remember the Suiz Canal Crisis? Think the motivation was political? Hell no, it was pure business reasoning. Ok it went badly for us, but that was because the climate had changed. The same reasoning had made us the most powerful nation on the planet, but its time had passed.
The fact is that at certain points in history, businessmen have been the right people to run things.
Remember that War of independence you had? Who were the initial group that started it all. Politicians? Nope, Businessmen....
Who were the people who did the most to ensure America's technological dominance and ultimate victory in WWII? Businessmen. When politicians make war armaments decisions entirely you get bad decisions, History showed this clearly. For example, the UK's war spending and research was almost entirely government controlled. That's why we rejected the Jet until the war was almost over. Would a businessman have done that? Oh hell no.
Parent
Re:Uh... (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Uh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Bill DID say he was leaving microsoft... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:The very same things which make us hate M$... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:The very same things which make us hate M$... (Score:5, Insightful)
Gates would make a horrible president because the country is not run like a dictatorship like all companies are. At MS he was the dictator, what he said went and anybody who questioned him could be canned. As a president you have to work with the congress. Bush had a compliant congress who were sycophantic to an obscene degree but even then he failed miserably in just about everything he tried.
Gates is not used to compromising, he is not used to being disagreed with. He would make a horrible president.
Parent
Imagine if ... (Score:5, Funny)
Pres Gates Day 1: The U.S. needs to become the most innovative country in the world, so I have decided in interest of attaining this goal we will rebuild Washington D.C.
Pres Gates Day 365: The Capital 2.0 is running ahead of schedule, I know it's been tough living and working out of trailers, but we should be finished within a year
Pres Gates Day 700: Due to the new competition from Tokyo's rebuilding operations, we have decided to restart our Capitol 2.0 project, but the delay will be worth it since our new Capitol will be even better than the original one planned
Pres Gates Day 1000: We have found that the Capitol 2.0 subway system was incompatible with the Capitol 2.0 sewage system, so we will rebuild DC's old subway system and try to make it work within the Capitol 2.0 structure
Pres Gates on his last day: On my final day in office, I am proud to unveil Capitol 2.0
Re:Imagine if ... (Score:5, Funny)
Everyone will forget Cheney once vice president Ballmer is in office. He breaks tie votes in the senate... with a chair!
Parent
BSoD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:BSoD (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry.
Parent
shock! (Score:5, Funny)
Have things really got that bad?
Remember (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Remember (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Remember (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Remember (Score:5, Insightful)
A point he made once that was worth remembering (paraphrasing a bit)...
Imagine that you're still unborn, in the womb, and are given the opportunity to choose the kind of world in which you'll be living after you're born. The only catch is that you can't know the circumstances of your birth - rich/poor, black/white, European/Somalian, healthy/sick, etc. Now, what kind of world do you choose when you have no idea where you'll fit into it? Buffett said that's the world you should be striving for.
Parent
Re:Remember (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Expect a ban on open source.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Expect a ban on open source.. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Is it April Fools Day already? (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, wait... is he running as a Republican?
Top Ten Reasons Bill Gates Would Run for President (Score:5, Funny)
2. He heard that some government agencies were using UNIX.
3. He wants to get that illegal sports car in SF Bay into the US.
4. He just thinks it would be neat to be president of two big thingies.
5. He's hot for Janet Reno.
6. His ego needs to be inflated.
7. He lost the key to his mansion, so he needs a new place to live.
8. He thinks that he can use MS Money to balance the budget.
9. He feels that Perot just didn't throw enough money at it.
10. He wants to make Windows '95 the official operating system of the USA.
Ok, those look kind of dated...but still funny
On the serious side, I wonder how many people with the power to see into the mysterious future, were tempted to e-mail the editor about a SERIOUS problem with this story!
Transporter_ii
Qualifications? (Score:5, Funny)
Careful what ya wish for, I suppose.
Prepare (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's forget open-source software for any public activities.
Er...uh...*cowers*
On the flip side, special interest groups declare bankruptancy. Groups claim they became ineffective because when ever they tried to buy Bill Gates he declined expressing that he already had enough headaches trying to spend the billions he already has.
I wouldn't vote for Gates... (Score:5, Interesting)
a waste of materiel (Score:5, Interesting)
The ultimate application of the Dilbert Principle (Score:5, Funny)
The IRONY (Score:4, Funny)
This is what I get:
"Error establishing a database connection"
How ironic. Bill Gates' presidential bid stymied by technical difficulties.
And by "ironic" I mean "totally expected and predictable."
Finally! (Score:4, Funny)
Crow T. Trollbot
Just one question (Score:5, Funny)
Except, of course (Score:5, Funny)
Except, of course, the security and stability of its most popular computer operating system.
I solemnly swear to embrace the Constitution... (Score:5, Funny)
Only 4 jobs prepare someone to be President (Score:5, Interesting)
1. State Governors
2. Vice-Presidents
3. U.S. Congressional Representatives
4. Generals
5 (almost never, but once in a century or so) a U.S. Senator
This means that the following people will NOT be elected President in 2008:
Bill Gates
Condoleeza Rice
Rudy Guliani
and the following people have a real chance only if their opponent is also a U.S. Senator:
John Kerry
Hillary Clinton
John McCain
John Edwards
Re:Worst idea I've ever heard. (Score:4, Insightful)
If you let it be too efficient, then they do things like round up all the gays, communists, jews, and anyone else they dislike and throw them in jail.
One of the major reasons the US is so sucessfull is that it created multiple layers of bureaucracy (Senate, House, Executive Branch, Legal system, State governments, etc.) instead of making one thing that just works well.
Fast governments do things without thinking, ignoring the wisdom of "hey, maybe we ought to stop and think about it before we make abortion illegal", and just go ahead and passes laws that people think they want when they are scared and terrified, instead of thinking long and hard about the long term consequences of it.
Parent
Re:Worst idea I've ever heard. (Score:5, Insightful)
No.
Good government is reasonable and thinks and debates until it's time to do something, then goes out and does it. "Inefficiency" and "Debate" are two completely different things, and equating them is like equating "debating the war in Iraq" with "not supporting our troops..." They are two completely different things that look somewhat alike to the unaware observer. I guess the real problem with our government is the people it has come to represent. Let me put it this way:
The seventh most visited site in the US is run by less than 50 people.
If that isn't a small number of people doing something beneficial for an extremely large number, I don't know what is. That's what I want out of government - run the water, run the electricity, run the courts system so it's fair, provide a social safety net, create an armed force that can defend our interests at home as effectively as necessary as cheaply as possible, push the economy to a high rate of growth, etc. And do it with as small a portion of the population and the population's resources as possible. The way our government is run now is completely purpose-less and the majority of it is done out of either sheer habit or the self-interest of politicians.
Parent
Re:Worst idea I've ever heard. (Score:5, Insightful)
You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.
An economically-efficient government could provide the same social services while charging less tax.
I think an ideal government would be slow to change laws and efficient with spending.
Parent
Re:First day on the Job (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Why not? (Score:4, Interesting)
Why not? Well, Billg is a very smart guy, he's extremely intense, extremely intelligent - can pick out and remember the smallest details from specs that are hundreds of pages long - and has generally been a pretty good leader for Microsoft. Not many people can make the transition from running a small business with 3 employees to having that business become the biggest software company in the world, with over 60,000 employees. He did, and he did it well. He's got real talent.
However, Microsoft is also a frigging bureaucratic mess of unbelievable proportions. A lot of you have probalby read that Joel on Software article about the shutdown menu in Vista, and the dev's response to it in which he describes a year-long process of weekly meetings mostly spent arguing over design features. The thing is, the whole company is like that. While I'm pretty sure Billg is a nice guy (I don't know him pesonally, but it's my impression) and he's very smart and I'm sure he has far more integrity than most politicians, I don't really want to put anyone who oversaw the creation of such a bureaucracy in charge of the government. After all, it took government far longer to evolve such a horrid bureacracy, Microsoft did it in only 30 years, and most of that happened in the last 20.
So, while I have tremendous respect for Billg for his accomplishments at Microsoft, and also for Linus Torvalds and Steve Jobs for their accomplishments, I wouldn't like to see any of them become president of the United States, thank you very much (not that Linus could, because of the stricture on being a citizen by birth, of course).
Parent