Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?

Bill Gates Handwriting Analyzed 609

Kaal Alexander Rosser writes "The BBC is reporting that a doodle left behind at a Davos press conference given by Tony Blair, Bill Gates and Bono shows the writer to be: "an unstable man" amongst other things. The Gates Foundation has confirmed the doodle was left there by Bill Gates."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bill Gates Handwriting Analyzed

Comments Filter:
  • unstable (Score:5, Funny)

    by minus_273 ( 174041 ) <> on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:47PM (#11529899) Journal
    i dont know about gates, but his OS is damn unstable.
    • The real scoop (Score:5, Insightful)

      by paranode ( 671698 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:53PM (#11530005)
      For those of you who didn't bother to look at TFA:

      A spokesman said: "Following the press conference given by the prime minister, Bill Gates and Bono in Davos on Thursday, a number of newspapers printed stories claiming that a page of notes and doodles left behind on the platform belonged to Tony Blair, and provided an insight into the mind of the prime minister.

      "They were in fact doodles made by Bill Gates.

      "We look forward with amusement to explanations by a variety of psychologists and graphologists of how various characteristics ascribed to the prime minister on the basis of the doodles, such as 'struggling to concentrate', 'not a natural leader', 'struggling to keep control of a confusing world' and 'an unstable man who is feeling under enormous pressure', equally apply to Mr Gates.

      "We are astonished that no-one who ran the story thought to ask No 10 if the doodles were in fact Mr Blair's, particularly as it was obvious to anyone the handwriting was totally different."

      In other words, graphology is BS and the people who analyzed it already had a preconceived notion about whose it was and made the appropriate BS analyses.

      • Re:The real scoop (Score:5, Insightful)

        by mrseigen ( 518390 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:59PM (#11530100) Homepage Journal
        I'm leaning towards "Really fucking bored". That's where all of my doodles come from.
      • Re:The real scoop (Score:5, Insightful)

        by eugene ts wong ( 231154 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:04PM (#11530173) Homepage Journal
        These remind me of lie detector tests. It's unfortunate that these ideas are given any credibility.
        • Re:The real scoop (Score:5, Insightful)

          by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:14PM (#11530285) Journal
          > These remind me of lie detector tests. It's
          > unfortunate that these ideas are given any
          > credibility.

          Agreed. Polygraphs are so pathetically unreliable, but unfortunately if you refuse to take one (which I would seriously consider if I was charged with a serious crime) then somehow that makes you guilty; the classic "If you're innocent, you've got nothing to fear." Even the cops know that lie detectors are crapola, but it's a useful tool to smoke out a true believer who thinks the freakin' things can read minds.

          People seem to give a lot of credence to this pseudoscience, though to my mind this sort of handwriting analysis is no better than phrenology and astrology.
          • Re:The real scoop (Score:4, Interesting)

            by Foobar of Borg ( 690622 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @03:15PM (#11530883)
            I hope this isn't getting too offtopic, but I remember that one of the big problems with polygraphs was the need for baseline values to determine truth and lying. Apart from the fact that you would respond differently when deliberately telling a lie because it is part of the procedure and when telling a lie to deceive, the baseline questions usually show the prejudices of the interrogator. For example, an interrogator will often ask "have you ever smoked before?" or "have you ever tried marijuana?" assuming, of course, that everyone has tried these. Therefore, if you say no, they assume that your response is the baseline for lying since obviously anyone who says they haven't is lying. And it is an unfalsifiable position.

            The human race would be so funny if they weren't so dangerous.

            • Re:The real scoop (Score:5, Interesting)

              by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @03:46PM (#11531195) Journal
              My understanding is that the problems with polygraphs are sufficiently numerous that they should be regarded as little more than mysticism. Cops use the excuse that they can feel out potential suspects, and providing that the potential suspects believe the test to be accurate, then I guess it may be just another tool like BSing a suspect about evidence, witnesses, etc. In other words, it's just a parlor trick to make a suspect screw up. So far as I'm aware no court in the US, Canada or Europe even allows polygraph "evidence" to be admitted.
          • Re:The real scoop (Score:5, Interesting)

            by MirthScout ( 247854 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @04:00PM (#11531369)
            You don't need to refuse to take a polygraph test.

            Always agree to take it. They will want you to sign a release form (they have no liability, blah, blah). Refuse to sign the release form. They will decide not to administer the polygraph test. Remind them that you are agreeing to take the polygraph test and it is they that are choosing not to administer it.

            I did this with an employer many years ago. It was very funny.
            • What does the release form cover?
              • Re:The real scoop (Score:5, Informative)

                by MirthScout ( 247854 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @05:10PM (#11532313)
                It was a long time ago so I can't quote it. As I recall, he release form I saw said that they could use the information in any way they deemed apropriate. That they would not disclose information from the test to anyone unless they determined the other party should have the information (basically that they could give the info to anyone they wanted). That they were not laible for any harm to me or my reputation.

                It was a page and a half saying they could do anything they wanted and I couldn't hold them liable.

                No way I'd sign that.

                The emplayer was a retailer you'd find a majority of malls in the US.

                To be fair, the man that was there to administer the polygraph was the president of his own company contracted by the retailer. He said the retailer's liability waiver was more extreme than most and showed me the standard one he uses for other clients. It still wasn't something I'd sign given how unreliable and subjective polygraphs are.

                He then asked if he could do a security interview. He explained that to be asking all the same questions but without the polygraph machine. I agreed to whichever he wanted to do. :)
      • by Stunning Tard ( 653417 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:16PM (#11530309) Journal
        As the parent notes the story isn't really about doodles by Bill Gates, but about doodles that aren't by Tony Blair. And the ensuing BS because people assumed they were. The only thing remarkable about Gate's involvement is that he's such a clear proof that the graphology is crap. Him being a genius and all.

        It's like when 2 students pass in the exact same assignment and get 2 vastly different marks.

        It's interesting but why does slashdot care about some doodles? I'm sure most of us don't. It has nothing to do with tech or tech-related news. If, however, there was an improved version of quick sort hidden in the doodles we should all sit up. Is there a way to mod the original articles down?
        • by dgatwood ( 11270 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @03:20PM (#11530950) Homepage Journal
          No, it isn't proof that graphology is crap. It is just a reminder that ANY qualitative analysis will be influenced by your own preconceived notions.

          But you're right. It is like when two students hand in the same assignment and get two different marks. The professor reads the paper and assigns a grade based in part upon the quality of the paper, but in part on preconceived notions of that student's performance. It's human nature.

          Now if none of these people had the slightest idea that it was believed to be Mr. Blair's, then that would prove that either graphology is crap, those people din't know what they were doing, or Mr. Gates is unstable and not a natural leader. There's not enough evidence here to say more than that.

          From everything I've read, Mr. Gates got lucky by buying MS-DOS from someone who didn't know its value, then used that as a springboard to buy other technologies and hire other people. That's not leadership. It's business. There's a big difference. Only the people directly under him can truly speak for his leadership skills or his stability. I don't see any volunteers coming forward, though.

          • by Brandybuck ( 704397 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @04:10PM (#11531473) Homepage Journal
            That's not leadership. It's business.

            Dislike him all you want, but the lack of technical skills does not equate to a lack of leadership. As a businessman, he is one of the world's top leaders. Yes, he got a few lucky breaks and happened to be in a few right places at the right time. As the old saying goes, "when opportunity knocks, answer the door". Bill Gates is a leader because he answered the door, walked through it, and kept on going. How many of us would have bet our fledgling business in 1981 by buying a CPM/86 clone?

            Or to put it another way, you don't take a two man firm financed off your mother's credit cards and shape it into a monopoly with 90%+ marketshare by being a follower.
          • by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, 2005 @04:51PM (#11532015)
            Then you need to read more.

            Not to mention evaluate your own statements. Using the tech to springboard other technologies is smart. Hiring other people around you to support a moving product is smart. Mobilizing at the right time is smart. Amassing resources is smart. The middle two have factors indicating good leadership.

            Frankly, organizing people well despite your flaws indicates quite a deal of leadership.

            Heck, knowing a business opportunity and moving on it...yes, it includes luck, but also mobility in decision making. Yes, he has a rich father, yes, he was gifted with above average technical intelligence, but you still have to DO quite a number of things to amass the fortune and company he has. /. readers bash the rich for not doing anything with money; he did. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and still did something with his life. People bash the rich for not giving back; he did and does significantly through his foundation. /.ers frequently claim smarts is being underappreciated in the US; then why are you attacking him almost on those very lines?

            Yes, business tactics do not indicate leadership by themselves. However, forming a multi-billion dollar company needs luck, intelligence, and leadership. Frankly, he's been on the front lines with Microsoft and was more so in the past, and despite all the MS bashing, he did make it into a monopoly, which surprisingly was his true miscalculation and the success was used against him.

            iow, despite the millions of naysayers, the talk, the ability to mobilize as he did, the only way that he was was taken down was because he was too successful and manipulative of the power he had already amassed.

            Further, why is it any surprise that Gates has his flaws? Maybe you are lucky and fortunate to have surrounded yourself with good people. But looking at the average person, and a comparison of the extremes to that average, Gates has fewer mental flaws than the norm. You just know about them because you and others like to nitpick at every damn thing.

            Frankly, it's the /. bully tactics similar to those used against nerds in school--find someone you don't like, group together, and bash them for being successful, being smart, etc. You talk about leadership versus the business success as being different things.

            The /. editors have gone on a recent run of anti-Gates the person run; you dislike MS? Then target the operating system. Don't target the man for being a human being and, *gasp*, having flaws. If you allow this to continue, you have little reason to be pissed if someone says you shouldn't use GPL software because Stallman is a dick.
      • In other words, graphology is BS and the people who analyzed it already had a preconceived notion about whose it was and made the appropriate BS analyses.

        And up until this point I thought it was all hard science. Next you are going to tell me that psychics and spoon-benders don't really have extraordinary powers.

        • Next you are going to tell me that psychics and spoon-benders don't really have extraordinary powers.

          But there is no spoon!

          Couldn't resist. :)
        • by drfireman ( 101623 ) <dan AT kimberg DOT com> on Monday January 31, 2005 @04:00PM (#11531376) Homepage
          I can bend spoons. It's hard to explain to a lay-person, but it just takes a bit of ... I don't know how to describe it, call it "leverage." I would be the last to call my powers extraordinary, this is really a power that is latent in all of us, but usually suppressed due to a mental block I will call, in shorthand, "respect for silverware."

          Handwriting analysis is also not complete crap. The other day, my wife went shopping, and correctly bought an item that I had written down on our shopping list, even though I myself couldn't read my own handwriting.
      • Amusing (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Pan T. Hose ( 707794 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @06:12PM (#11533390) Homepage Journal

        In other words, graphology is BS and the people who analyzed it already had a preconceived notion about whose it was and made the appropriate BS analyses.

        Graphology is just as laughable as astrology, acupuncture or homeopathy. Here's a nice experiment for your amusement: when you meet a "graphologist" who'd like to demonstrate her amazing "skills" to you, be sure to make an experiment using text copied from some newspaper, the same text written by all of the tested people who had no contact with the graphologist before and during the handwriting examination at all. Observing the graphologist's face when she doesn't have "side channels data" and no interaction with people to play with "cold reading" is a trully hilarious experience.

        "This shape might sometimes mean that maybe some kind of a impatience... am I right?"
        "Just keep going, I don't want to disturb you!"

        And the most funny thing is that unlike psychics they can't just make up some dumb excuses that they feel some disturbance of Force or that the Angels are scared by the camera, because they are supposed to be scientists. Looking at someone's writing you can usually tell the gender and age--the same I can guess reading someone's palm... Or foot... Or arse! Does it make me an arsologist?

        For more interesting informations read: Wikipedia article on graphology [], James Randi's comments on graphology [] (by The Amazing Randi of JREF [] who offers "a one-million-dollar prize [] to anyone who can show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event"), graphology in the Skeptic's Dictionary [] by Robert T. Carroll, PhD, and of course the excellent Quackwatch [] paper How Graphology Fools People [] by Barry L. Beyerstein, PhD. This is not the first time [] we can laugh at psedoscientific morons on Slashdot thanks to The Amazing Randi.

        And a comment to CmdrTaco: please add the Monty Python foot to the article because without it we look like a bunch of imbeciles. What next? Bill Gates tested by the lie detector [] and a story posted on Please just add the foot. Thanks.

    • He may be unstable and we all know his OS is unstable, but his checking account is very stable.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:47PM (#11529903)
    I'd have to say, no surprise there. Anyone who is a geek knows were all at least a little unstable... You have to be to be attracted by Technology more than girls.
    • by oliana ( 181649 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:57PM (#11530075) Homepage
      I believe the correct sentiment is "more successful" with technology than girls.

  • by fitten ( 521191 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:47PM (#11529904)
    are probably nothing more than variations of the $ sign... =)
  • by tuxette ( 731067 ) * <> on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:47PM (#11529906) Homepage Journal
    Geez, what next? Are they going to do his star charts? or read the coffee grind remains in his mug?
  • Aha (Score:4, Funny)

    by spellraiser ( 764337 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:47PM (#11529908) Journal
    The 'unstable man, unstable OS' jokes may begin ... now.
  • Wow (Score:5, Funny)

    by Quasar1999 ( 520073 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:47PM (#11529911) Journal
    Really, handwriting analysis? This is the computer age... I don't even know how to write... I put an 'X' in the 'sign here' section... everything else I type... If they analysed my handwriting, well... they'd think I was a 2 year old with a crayon. ;)
    • Re:Wow (Score:2, Funny)

      by MPHellwig ( 847067 ) *
      "If they analysed my handwriting, well... they'd think I was a 2 year old with a crayon. ;)"

      Naah, much to easy this one ;-)
    • then, by definition, "X" is your signature.
    • Re:Wow (Score:5, Funny)

      by Foofoobar ( 318279 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:56PM (#11530059)
      If they analysed my handwriting, well... they'd think I was a 2 year old with a crayon

      I thought most Visual Basic users were. ;)
    • Re:Wow (Score:3, Interesting)

      by essreenim ( 647659 )
      I found a great sight with downloadable hand writing sheets in my final CS year. It had a sentance fully in hand (thatch-writing), with lots of sentances below with dots, so you could practice again and again. It was really good as it calmed me for the exams. I felt like I was back in playschool writing my lovely curly and puposeful writing. I actually felt like taking up caligraphy. There is something spitiual about this writing, something we are sadly losing in the computer age. I did it to recontruct my
    • it was kind of an annoying form anyway, something somebody has knocked up on word and never tried to use so you get:

      First Name: ....... [whole page width]
      Address of Mortgage Provider (1st Applicant) .. [2 inches]

      but i got the same thing, my handwriting was appalling even when i was at school. i looked at this form after i had completed it and just wanted to cross my name out and write "MUNGO" in large letters across the page. and i had to print in capitals. even i cant read my own joined up writing any mo
  • by WormholeFiend ( 674934 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:48PM (#11529918)
    a "doodie".

    I thought, pity the lab technician who had to do this for media purposes.
  • by savagedome ( 742194 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:48PM (#11529919)
    Paula: Can you grab my purse.
    George: Yeah.( reaches for the purse and finds a piece of paper . he looks annoyed.
    Monks , next day .George showing Jerry the piece of paper he picked up
    Jerry: Yeah! So
    George; Don't you see what this is?
    Jerry: Yeah! It's a doodle.
    George: Yeah!, a doodle of me...look at the size of the nose , the ears, all my features are distorted.
    Jerry: Oh!.It's an affectionate caricature.
    George: I'm grotesque . I look like a troll.
    Jerry: It's just a drawing.
    George: Don't you see what this says? How can you possibly like somebody ,if you think they look like this?
  • by brian ferullo ( 632354 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:48PM (#11529924)
    what bad joke is this setting up?
    • ...and the bar tender says, "We don't serve big wigs here like you.".

      Tony Blair says, "But can we at least vote on it?".

      The bartender says, "No!".

      Bill Gates says, "But we just need a place to crash.".

      The bartender felt betrayed because he expected support from Bill, and thus said, "You too??".

      Bono says, "Yes...".
    • You have a gun but only two bullets, who do you shoot?
    • by 955301 ( 209856 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:14PM (#11530288) Journal
      Tony Blair, Bill Gates and Bono walk into a bar within 5 minutes of one another and sit down.

      With an obvious need to one up the other two egos in the room, Tony orders a kamikazi and says, "I know they say the three of us are quite unstable, but I believe I have you chaps beat, even on that front. I overthrew a country on the advice of a Texan." He passes a "one-free-knighting" coupon to the bartender for escro on his challenge.

      Gates, drinking a screwdriver and squiggling on a piece of paper, blurts out "It's not like Britain didn't do that to the same people before. Try dominating the world with a collection of buggy software and an army of marketroids. Allow the single most significant collaborative creation of the 20th century to be brought to its knees. Then get back to me". He passes a check totaling the GNP of a small country to the bartendar to see Blair's challenge.

      Bono, not even inclined to remove his sunglasses responds passes a black I-pod to the bartender. "You see that blonde, at the end of the bar? I'm going to eat her now." He downs his tequila, walks up the blonde, stabs her repeatedly, then eats her, and returns to the conversation.

      The bartender interjects and says to Bono "I don't think your instability counts... after all, you're on drugs, and that makes it artificial." Bono, looking puzzled because he hadn't taken a pill in at least three days says "Hell, I'm not on drugs". The bartender passes the pot to Gates, refills the men's drinks and replies, "of course you are, that was a bar-bitch-you-ate".

  • by Jeff Hornby ( 211519 ) <jthornby@sympati[ ]ca ['co.' in gap]> on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:48PM (#11529931) Homepage
    and before anybody jumps on this bandwagon, let's remember that handwriting analysis is only a little more authoritative than phrenology or astrology
    • Is that why every major government intelligence house in the Western world devotes so many employees to it? Because oddly, I've never heard of a phrenologist working for the CIA and the astrologer/psychic they hired a few decades ago as a consultant was unceremoniously relieved of her duties after a string of nothing but failures, whereas the handwriting analysis unit is still around.
      • Is that why every major government intelligence house in the Western world devotes so many employees to it? Because oddly, I've never heard of a phrenologist working for the CIA and the astrologer/psychic they hired a few decades ago as a consultant was unceremoniously relieved of her duties after a string of nothing but failures, whereas the handwriting analysis unit is still around.

        Would these be the same Western intelligence agencies who for years overestimated the capabilities of the Soviet Union and

    • They're not by any means 100% accurate, but my grandfather used to do contracting analysing handwriting of potential executive hires for a few companies.

      Now, he'll be the first to tell you that it's not a perfect science -- but if you see five different indicators that suggest the person is dishonest, there's a better chance that there's a correlation.

      Here are a few points that I remember from reading the manual that he had written --
      • Pressure of the writing is an indicator of the person's stress level.
      • My handwriting is non-existant. My verticals go off in every direction and my line is uneven.

        Am I disorganized? An idiot?

        No. I have MS. To me the pen is an instrument of torture; my own.

      • My grandfather is Carl Pacifico [], and after being a chemical engineer, moved to management, and then, after selling his company, became a business consultant. (which is when he was doing handwriting analysis).

        He started studying human behavior, and from that, thinking in general, and now spends his time trying to further research into cognative neuropsychology [].

        He's not some Miss Clio wanna-be trying to hawk his wares. I don't even know if he's done much with his handwriting analysis work in years, if not
  • by bushboy ( 112290 ) <> on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:48PM (#11529934) Homepage
    Hey, the poor guy has been hammered left right and center for years - can you blame him for being a bit troubled !

    I bet he draws penguins and apples and little tiny bugs and all sorts of odd things when he's bored !
  • He was the head of Microsoft, and now seems to be the hand too. Maybe the analysis showed that he is unsafe too.
  • See for yourself (Score:5, Informative)

    by SYFer ( 617415 ) <> on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:48PM (#11529938) Homepage
    Here's a look at the actual doodle [].
  • If you want to see the doodle in full, you can here [].
  • Bear in mind... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gowen ( 141411 ) <> on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:50PM (#11529976) Homepage Journal
    Most of those assessments were made when the "graphologists" in question were under the belief the doodle was Blair's. So we should withhold judgement until we have second opinions from the Phrenologists [], Dowsers [] and any other Pseudo-Scientific Charlatans [] who feel like chipping in with their worthless, substance less opinions...
  • Excuse me while I go consult the "I Ching" to find out whether Microsoft intends to embed Internet Explorer in "Office 2007".
  • by big-giant-head ( 148077 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:51PM (#11529986)
    Right up there with reading tea leaves and goat entrails.

    Now analysis to verify for a court that this is the defendants handwriting yes or no,for example is a science.

    Tying some Psychological profile to someone's doodle is a joke......
  • Him2? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:51PM (#11529988) Homepage Journal
    Blair left his doodles [] behind for analysis, too. And so we can conclude from the absence of Bono's doodles, and consequent lack of analysis, that Bono is paranoid, justifiably.

  • Seriously. WTF. It's like you plug in "Bill Gates" into Google ... hit I'm feeling lucky ... and you got youself a headline.
  • i usually don't believe much in psychological analysis like this because they are usually very, very subjective, a lot of "conclusions" heavily biased by prior knowledge.

    the fact who "analysts" thought was the source of writing turned out to be incorrect makes it pretty interesting. :)

  • ...when someone has read the bumps on his head.
  • by tod_miller ( 792541 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:52PM (#11529999) Journal
    How did they crack the DRM on the doodles so they they could be analysed outside of Media Player?

    And why didn't the paper contain a little ticker that showed the time and date and author of the doodle?

    Anyone have a link the torrent? Oh man, I feel strange... it must be the /. effect.

    Did the doodles point to any new ideas in windows? Or was one of the doodles a strange on-flying bird like creature being beaten to death by office stationary (paperclips)

    Who knows? :-) Or was it a monkey screaming 'oooh ooh develoopers! developers developers! aaaargh!'
  • by adam31 ( 817930 ) <[adam31] [at] []> on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:53PM (#11530011)
    I saw Bill get a tarot card reading in Las Vegas a while back.

    I remember one card had a Skull...
    and the other had a Penguin.

  • Apparently it was a conference attended by Tony Blair(PM of Britain) and Bill Gates. The press picked up the doodle thinking it was Tony Blair and had psy guys analyze it and come up with the "not a leader", "mentally unfocused" and so on analysis.

    Then after publishing all that they found out it was Bill Gates' doodles. He may not be mentally focused or a leader, but he just happens to be the wealthiest man in the world.
  • So Gates drew some doodles on a piece of paper. They though it was blares analysided it and figured that he was not a good leader then found out it was Gates. Ok so what do these doodles consist of. A picture of him ripping apart a penguin. Or just pritty flowers everywhere, or just abstract lines that may loosly resemble something. There isn't much insite in saying hey our sciencetist think that Gates is unstable because of his doodles, what about the doodles proove this?
  • Does anyone dare analyze RMS's handwriting?
  • by BlueThunderArmy ( 751258 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:54PM (#11530026) Homepage
    The "unstable" and "unfit to lead" assessments were made when the doodle was assumed to have been made by Tony Blair. While you would think that the same conclusions would be drawn regardless of the identity of the scribbler, there is speculation that the original conclusions were politically motivated.
  • Geez, is nothing sacred? I suppose next we'll be reading about a psychochemical analysis of Mr. Gates based on stool residue he may have left behind in the public loo. Heh, I wish this were just a joke, but I've seem some nanotech that might just make that sort of thing feasible in the future...
  • by Anita Coney ( 648748 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:56PM (#11530054) Homepage

    From reviewing the doodle [], it's is my expert opinion that Bill Gates has the doodling skill of my five year old son!

  • by the_skywise ( 189793 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:56PM (#11530063)
    Bill Gates' psychological analysis using the science of Numerology, his tea leaves from his last sushi dinner and a phrenologic reading of his cranium.
  • This is juvenile (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CaptainZapp ( 182233 ) * on Monday January 31, 2005 @01:58PM (#11530098) Homepage
    Look, I like a good microsoft bashing, just as most of my fellow slashdooters, but don't you think that this is a very cheap shot?

    No doubt that Microsoft has some shady business tactics. There's no question that they provide shoddy products from a security perspective and then push responsibility for their goofs to on user community. There's the issue ,of corse, that they hound free software by the cheapest pr tricks in the book and the system Microsoft sucks shit! Well, hell! There's a lot of valid complaints when it comes to chastising Microsoft as a corporation

    I really don't want to ideolize Mr. Gates and he is often guilty of wrong speak; willingly or out of ignorance.

    But attempting a character analyses from a doodle he left at a conference (which potentially was boring) is just plain juvenile.

    Hold your ammunition for the real issues, slashdot, and retain your credibility in the bargain...

  • by Cyn ( 50070 ) <cyn.cyn@org> on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:00PM (#11530119) Homepage
    My analysis? He was practicing writing with his alternate hand - because he was bored. I tried this over the weekend, and my scrawl looked similar to this.

    I dunno - I don't consider myself all that anal, but my notes are generally a lot less flamboyant than that - a little more organized, legible, useful, etc.
  • Tony Blair, Bill Gates and Bono walk into a bar.
    "So, Bill", says Tony, "What about that 80% discount on MS software?"
    "No way" says Bill.
    "Bill. Software patents. Just for you. A word to the jury in patent cases."
    Bill stares at Tony, takes out a pen and starts nervously doodling on a coaster.
    "No. I can't. Not 80%".
    "Must be 80%. Just the government. Schools... We'll make it obligatory in schools. No discounts either."
    "60%, please, Tony, I can't." - Bill bites his lip and staring blankly at the coaster, continu
  • Pseudo-science (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Savant ( 85811 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:07PM (#11530200)
    Why is this newsworthy? Graphology is completely unsound from a scientific point of view, though it might interest students of the Forer effect. What next? Steve Ballmer's horoscope? What the tarot has to say about Larry Ellison's future? Crop circles resembling Linus' face? (All right, I reckon the last one could possibly be newsworthy. But, still, do we really want to go further in this direction?)

  • by gwjc ( 181552 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:10PM (#11530237)
    I dislike micro$oft as much as the next slashdotter, BUT handwriting analysis! Why not check his bio-rhythmn and astrological correspondences while you're at it. I bet even Bill still has enough geek in his soul to laugh at the morons who think his handwriting revealed anything other than the colour of ink he was using.
  • by ehiris ( 214677 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:15PM (#11530302) Homepage
    Psychologists and handwriting experts were drafted in by the press in the hope of getting a glimpse into the inner workings of the prime ministerial mind.

    Newspaper stories contained phrases such as "struggling to concentrate" and "not a natural leader".

    That's why the pshychologists and handwriting experts spend a lot of time analyzing a doodle while Bill Gates is very rich and leads a multi-billion dollar industry.

    It reminds me of someone who was explaining to me that there's no money in the cumputer business. He said that he was a business owner in an excellent industry. I later found out that he was the bathroom dude in a bar.
  • by xutopia ( 469129 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:31PM (#11530479) Homepage
    I find this distasteful. Bill Gates probably has horrible hand writing but guess what? So do most people who type instead of handwrite. Heck I'm so used to my palm pilot as the only thing remotely ressembling hand writing that when I need to write using a real pen I laugh at myself making plenty of horrors.

    This is really of bad taste guys. As much as I think Bill G. is Napoleonic and demented I don't put that basis on his handwriting.

  • by ninjagin ( 631183 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:42PM (#11530591)
    ... triangles and squares. It seems pretty harmless enjoyment of 2-D geometry to me. I didn't see any icky-faces or similarly juvenile imagery, just a bunch of triangles and squares and a bunch of bullet points.

    When I doodle, I end up with spheres and cubes and conic sections, not because I'm a great three-dimensional thinker, but because I like to practice light/shadows and foreshortening.

    Maybe Bill was practicing his triangles? Even if they were Tony's doodles, what's so wrong with Tony practicing triangles?

    What I get from it is this: Some of the most powerful people in the world have fun with triangles, so they must be okay to play with.

  • by i41Overlord ( 829913 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @02:56PM (#11530717)
    I saw a show on the Discovery Channel a few years back that sort of discussed the same sort of thing- handwriting analysis, art critiquing, phychics, etc.

    They showed art critics discussing the art they were looking at and describing, in detail, the emotions and message that the artist was trying to convey.

    The show's host didn't believe any of that so he showed some "respected" art critics a piece of art, which looked like scribble to me- it was just random strokes of the brush in different colors. The critics all agreed with each other and explained what exactly the artist was thinking, and the raw emotion that went into the painting.

    Very impressive, I thought- and maybe I would have believed them had the artist not been AN ELEPHANT.

    Yes, an elephant painted the picture with its trunk. The "respected" art critics were really just good at winning popularity contests- in reality they had no clue what they were talking about. It's the same thing between a "good" phychic and a "bad" psychic- neither one knows what they're talking about, but one just seems "more believable" than the other.
  • by flibuste ( 523578 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @03:38PM (#11531124)

    Handwriting analysis is well known to be a non-science with non-facts based on non-events that produce non-results.

    It's also a non-brainer way for slashdotters to do some M$ bashing.

    Maybe it's time for /. to move on or for me to stop wasting my time. The quality of information on this site is degrading every day.

  • by wuice ( 71668 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @03:53PM (#11531291) Homepage
    I hate to say it, but nerds have finally gone too far. Do you guys have ANYTHING better to do than player hate all over Bill's doodles?!
  • Dudes! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Spackler ( 223562 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @07:19PM (#11534352) Journal
    If I ever become rich and famous, I am going to leave doodles of boobies all over the place. They will think I am a sex obsessed pig.... Oh.
  • by Evil Pete ( 73279 ) on Monday January 31, 2005 @10:18PM (#11536003) Homepage

    I read this automatically as being about Bill Gates at a Davros press conference. Immediate thought: Davros, inventor of the Daleks, and Bill Gates together. You just know it makes sense.

    Hmmm. Must . get . out . more.

1 1 was a race-horse, 2 2 was 1 2. When 1 1 1 1 race, 2 2 1 1 2.