5 ms·

"...Eton and Oxford, which happens to be where I went" I prefer to be charitable and assume that he wrote this for the purposes of disclosure and to qualify hi

"...Eton and Oxford, which happens to be where I went" I prefer to be charitable and assume that he wrote this for the purposes of disclosure and to qualify his knowledge of those institutions. I don't think he was drawing a comparison between himself and Ramanujan. Yes - Wolfram has a tendency for self-promotion, and this can be a bit tiresome. But, like others who have commented here, I find the seemingly obligatory condemnation of him to be tiresome too. The difference between Wolfram and his detractors on HN is that Wolfram (as well as clearly being very smart) invariably has something interesting to say.

harperlee 11y ago
It also makes the article more personal, which is something that generally improves communication.
- protomyth 11y ago
  I can only imagine some of the folks reaction to the old storytellers who constantly interjected their personal experience (and sometime the audiences) into the old stories. It honestly shows how the teller relates to the subject. If I had a mathematical tool or language, I would use it to show the work in a story about a mathematician.
  - harperlee 11y ago
    Exactly. In general, relating things to the persons behind them gives a lot of context and clarifies why things end up as they are. Although it doesn't only touch these, "Connections", from James Burke, comes to mind. There was a link here a couple of months ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11075430 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11075430).
aws_ls 11y ago
Agree. I read the article from another source, and came to HN expecting that very criticism. Its so tiresome. They didn't even consider that this article by Wolfram took a rare effort to go into lot of Math of Ramanujan. And the core insight of experimental (Ramanujan style) Math vs formal proof oriented (Hardy style) Math and its parallels i.e. the former approach is definitely enabled by Wolfram Mathematica, is very convincing. And to miss all that, and just harp on self promotion by Wolfram is disingenuous or a very stereotypical comment. And its the top HN comment.
- lolo_ 11y ago
  So it's not ok to point out blatant product placement in an otherwise great article on a historic figure? If somebody wrote a piece on Abraham Lincoln, then interjected the piece several times with discussion about their political research website product, you'd remain silent and think to yourself 'oh God HN, focusing on the wrong thing again' if anybody dared comment on it? And how is it disingenuous? Have you read the piece? It's pretty blatant! I consider that it took a lot of effort, and find the piece really excellent other than this stuff, but it can't just go uncommented on because some overly sensitive souls can't tolerate dissenting comments. Personally I find these hipster-ish 'I hate the hate man' type comments disingenuous...
  - willvarfar 11y ago
    If a well-known politician wrote a piece on Abraham Lincoln, then interjected the piece several times with discussion about their political opinions, I'd say that was fair for an article by the politician about another politician.
    - lolo_ 11y ago
      And? This bears no relevance to the point I made. What I said was: '...then interjected the piece several times with discussion about their political research website product' If you're making the comparison in that Wolfram is a mathematician giving his opinion on Ramanujan, a historical mathematician, well you're missing my point entirely - in fact if you read my comments here you'll see that I find the article really excellent in those parts where he refrains from his advertising. My issue is with comments like: "Today with Mathematica and the Wolfram Language we have immensely more powerful tools with which to do experiments and make discoveries in mathematics (not to mention the computational universe in general)." Well, today with 'modern software' would do don't you think? If it was once or twice it'd be forgiveable, but there are several paragraphs like this throughout the article. Yes, I realise it was first posted on the wolfram blog, but I think it would have been a little more respectful had Wolfram restrained himself at least a bit in this regard, it's incredibly jarring when you're talking on a historical subject.
lolo_ 11y ago
How would you feel if you read the same piece on a microsoft site with constant interjections about how you can do amazing stuff with excel now? Would you find the comments here 'tiresome' and make a passive aggressive comment about how irritating and uninteresting those commenters are compared to this microsoft guy? I find the piece really fascinating, but filling an otherwise excellently written article on a really fascinating historical figure with what is blatantly product placement is frustrating, and guess what - people get to comment on it on a comment site. If you find the comments tiring, don't read them. And note what your comment is doing - you're meta-commenting on tiresomeness, how riveting! Perhaps we can have another meta level and then... they'll be interesting? ;) Also just to clarify - are you claiming that Wolfram doesn't self-promote? I'd suggest re-reading the piece if you don't agree. I was thinking the same thing as the top commenter here, and was glad to see that I wasn't the only one who noticed it (I wasn't aware there was a tendency towards disdain - probably justified - for Wolfram here beforehand actually.) Having said all that, it's a fascinating piece once you filter out that noise!
- andyjohnson0 11y ago
  I agree that Wolfram has a tendency for self promotion, and didn't claim otherwise. When people on HN constantly point this out and assume negative intent, every time something he has written is submitted, the result is tiresome noise. But having read both of your extensive comments, I get it that you feel strongly about this: that comes across very clearly. Edit: second sentence for clarity.
  - lolo_ 11y ago
    Tip for these kind of discussions - don't get personal unless it's relevant - my feelings on this (which you misinterpret actually) are irrelevant, and this just sounds like a bit of an underhand dig whether you intended it as such or not. In actuality I am not really that bothered about Wolfram at all haha, I just disagreed with what _you_ said :) Back to the discussion, I am glad you agree on the self-promotion aspect. Personally I don't ascribe negative intent, but I do think it's worth pointing out this stuff when you see it, so still fundamentally disagree with what you said. Also, I tend to write a lot in every comment, so length of comment != importance to me, rather consider me overly verbose... EDIT: Downvoted for criticising an ad hominem - ah HN, don't you ever change, you cute, cute little dandelion!
kybernetikos 11y ago
> I find the seemingly obligatory condemnation of him to be tiresome too. It is indeed totally boring. In fact this whole thread that happens every time anyone posts anything by Wolfram is very dull. I would say that I do get some value from seeing a rough inappropriate sales pitch : interesting information ratio on posts (not just Wolframs), and it is one of the reasons I frequently visit the comments before going to the page. HN can be susceptible to front page links that have poor ratios. Still, I'm not sure how we can get that benefit without these terminally dull threads of condemnation and counter condemnation. Really I'd just like a bot to figure out the ratio and display it next to the link. Sounds like a hard problem.

harperlee 11y ago

It also makes the article more personal, which is something that generally improves communication.

protomyth 11y ago
I can only imagine some of the folks reaction to the old storytellers who constantly interjected their personal experience (and sometime the audiences) into the old stories. It honestly shows how the teller relates to the subject. If I had a mathematical tool or language, I would use it to show the work in a story about a mathematician.
- harperlee 11y ago
  Exactly. In general, relating things to the persons behind them gives a lot of context and clarifies why things end up as they are. Although it doesn't only touch these, "Connections", from James Burke, comes to mind. There was a link here a couple of months ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11075430 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11075430).

aws_ls 11y ago

Agree. I read the article from another source, and came to HN expecting that very criticism. Its so tiresome. They didn't even consider that this article by Wolfram took a rare effort to go into lot of Math of Ramanujan. And the core insight of experimental (Ramanujan style) Math vs formal proof oriented (Hardy style) Math and its parallels i.e. the former approach is definitely enabled by Wolfram Mathematica, is very convincing. And to miss all that, and just harp on self promotion by Wolfram is disingenuous or a very stereotypical comment. And its the top HN comment.

lolo_ 11y ago
So it's not ok to point out blatant product placement in an otherwise great article on a historic figure? If somebody wrote a piece on Abraham Lincoln, then interjected the piece several times with discussion about their political research website product, you'd remain silent and think to yourself 'oh God HN, focusing on the wrong thing again' if anybody dared comment on it? And how is it disingenuous? Have you read the piece? It's pretty blatant! I consider that it took a lot of effort, and find the piece really excellent other than this stuff, but it can't just go uncommented on because some overly sensitive souls can't tolerate dissenting comments. Personally I find these hipster-ish 'I hate the hate man' type comments disingenuous...
- willvarfar 11y ago
  If a well-known politician wrote a piece on Abraham Lincoln, then interjected the piece several times with discussion about their political opinions, I'd say that was fair for an article by the politician about another politician.
  - lolo_ 11y ago
    And? This bears no relevance to the point I made. What I said was: '...then interjected the piece several times with discussion about their political research website product' If you're making the comparison in that Wolfram is a mathematician giving his opinion on Ramanujan, a historical mathematician, well you're missing my point entirely - in fact if you read my comments here you'll see that I find the article really excellent in those parts where he refrains from his advertising. My issue is with comments like: "Today with Mathematica and the Wolfram Language we have immensely more powerful tools with which to do experiments and make discoveries in mathematics (not to mention the computational universe in general)." Well, today with 'modern software' would do don't you think? If it was once or twice it'd be forgiveable, but there are several paragraphs like this throughout the article. Yes, I realise it was first posted on the wolfram blog, but I think it would have been a little more respectful had Wolfram restrained himself at least a bit in this regard, it's incredibly jarring when you're talking on a historical subject.

lolo_ 11y ago

How would you feel if you read the same piece on a microsoft site with constant interjections about how you can do amazing stuff with excel now? Would you find the comments here 'tiresome' and make a passive aggressive comment about how irritating and uninteresting those commenters are compared to this microsoft guy? I find the piece really fascinating, but filling an otherwise excellently written article on a really fascinating historical figure with what is blatantly product placement is frustrating, and guess what - people get to comment on it on a comment site. If you find the comments tiring, don't read them. And note what your comment is doing - you're meta-commenting on tiresomeness, how riveting! Perhaps we can have another meta level and then... they'll be interesting? ;) Also just to clarify - are you claiming that Wolfram doesn't self-promote? I'd suggest re-reading the piece if you don't agree. I was thinking the same thing as the top commenter here, and was glad to see that I wasn't the only one who noticed it (I wasn't aware there was a tendency towards disdain - probably justified - for Wolfram here beforehand actually.) Having said all that, it's a fascinating piece once you filter out that noise!

andyjohnson0 11y ago
I agree that Wolfram has a tendency for self promotion, and didn't claim otherwise. When people on HN constantly point this out and assume negative intent, every time something he has written is submitted, the result is tiresome noise. But having read both of your extensive comments, I get it that you feel strongly about this: that comes across very clearly. Edit: second sentence for clarity.
- lolo_ 11y ago
  Tip for these kind of discussions - don't get personal unless it's relevant - my feelings on this (which you misinterpret actually) are irrelevant, and this just sounds like a bit of an underhand dig whether you intended it as such or not. In actuality I am not really that bothered about Wolfram at all haha, I just disagreed with what _you_ said :) Back to the discussion, I am glad you agree on the self-promotion aspect. Personally I don't ascribe negative intent, but I do think it's worth pointing out this stuff when you see it, so still fundamentally disagree with what you said. Also, I tend to write a lot in every comment, so length of comment != importance to me, rather consider me overly verbose... EDIT: Downvoted for criticising an ad hominem - ah HN, don't you ever change, you cute, cute little dandelion!

kybernetikos 11y ago

> I find the seemingly obligatory condemnation of him to be tiresome too. It is indeed totally boring. In fact this whole thread that happens every time anyone posts anything by Wolfram is very dull. I would say that I do get some value from seeing a rough inappropriate sales pitch : interesting information ratio on posts (not just Wolframs), and it is one of the reasons I frequently visit the comments before going to the page. HN can be susceptible to front page links that have poor ratios. Still, I'm not sure how we can get that benefit without these terminally dull threads of condemnation and counter condemnation. Really I'd just like a bot to figure out the ratio and display it next to the link. Sounds like a hard problem.