4 ms·
See I neither agree or disagree with your opinions about wolfram. But by discussing wolfram's character in this thread you have managed to steer entire discuss
by gnufied 10y ago
See I neither agree or disagree with your opinions about wolfram.
But by discussing wolfram's character in this thread you have managed to steer entire discussion on wolfram rather than mathematics of Ramanujan. Unfortunately this happens too often in any online discourse, where subject matter is entirely ignored but most of the discussion focuses on tangential stuff. It is especially true when commenting on actual subject matter requires some solid background or research, but somehow many people feel obligated to comment anyways. It is classic low hanging fruit vs contributing something real to the discussion.
- gmantom 10y agoThis is a good point but aren't you doing the same thing? sorry that was a cheeky response. One thing I will say on your point is that this sort of "side" discourse sometimes brings about real good discussion. Maybe the actual article itself dosent spawn anything new or maybe it is too complex for most folks. However, sometimes the comments lead to new articles to explore a "side" idea that came out from the online comments. So many articles I've read lately start with "There was a great discussion on hacker news on this topic I felt obligated to write about it, you can find it here". I think this is healthy.