I think he's more likely to be a darkworker. Starting his foundation, with all the good it may be doing, does not mean he has necessarily changed into a lightworker.
If you look at how he conducted his business at Microsoft, from the stories about how he formed it, to the practices the company followed as they grew and dominated the industry, I think his motivation looks a lot more like the darkworker polarization. If you accept Steve's theory about what happens to a darkworker vs. a lightworker (attracting competitors, instead of attracting help and generosity), I think it also looks more like the description of a darkworker.
The foundation does not mean that he has changed at all. Forming this foundation isn't incompatible with the darkworker framework. When this foundation was formed, Microsoft was under tremendous pressure about their anti-competitive practices, much moreso than they are today--what better PR could he have than to announce very publicly to the world that you're giving away billions to good causes?
Taking that further, he has more money than he would ever need personally, and there are no major competitors that can really threaten Microsoft, so the challenge isn't really there the way it used to be. Bill needs another venue to challenge him, and his foundation provides another means for accomplishment. He gets to control which causes get *major* funding and which do not, he gets to bully around whichever charities he chooses. He even convinced Warren Buffet to throw all of his money into the Gates Foundation pot, so in effect he's monopolizing the charitable foundation "industry" the same way he did with software.
Still sounds like a darkworker to me.
|