11 ms·
Wolfram blocked publication of a mathematical proof with a court order
- dataphyte 10y agoNewton wasn't above abusing his position as head of the Royal Society to discredit Leibniz. Wolfram reminds me of Newton—a self-conscious genius, exceedingly jealous of his intellectual primacy. I think Wolfram even compares NKS to Newton's Principia on the book's dust jacket if I recall.
- awinter-py 10y agonewton stuck a knitting needle in his eye to find out where colors come from
- mattnewton 10y agoHe didn't do a bad job at that. He also wrote over 100 books on alchemy (that he didn't publish because it would have been illegal to practice), tried to predict the apocalypse from the Bible, predicted a Jewish repopulation is Jerusalem from similar crazy bible numerologies, and, because he saw himself as a priest of the natural world, never married.
- valuearb 10y agoDoes not sound that different than the typical systems architect.
- jacquesm 10y agoI could not help but note your last name...
- hnbroseph 10y ago> because he saw himself as a priest of the natural world, never married some speculate that it was because he loved another (also unmarried) man, Fatio de Duillier.
- pbhjpbhj 10y agoNot a knitting needle but a bodkin, at least that's what I heard. A bodkin [needle] is for threading and has a rounded end. As I heard it he was investigating the action of the eye rather than colour per se and managed to induce visual artefacts, possibly by contacting the optic nerve. Citation with corroboration/correction appreciated.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- hprotagonist 10y agothe difference being that newton was generally right.
- icelancer 10y agoAbout Leibniz stealing his work? Or his inferior notation methods?
- bitwize 10y agoWhen I first heard of The Big Bang Theory I though Sheldon Cooper was, specifically, supposed to be a parody of Wolfram.
- CaliforniaKarl 10y agoPlease help me understand this. If I understand this correctly, the Wikipedia snippet is saying that Mr. Cook developed this theory while under a related NDA with Wolfram Research; and that by publishing a paper, Mr. Cook violated that NDA. The paper in question, the conference, and the injunction blocking publication all happened in 2015. If I understand that correctly, then should this post be marked "(2015)"? Also, this seems to me to be a rather run-of-the-mill NDA violation case. The only things making it more more noteable is it being an NDA related to math, and how one of the parties involved is Wolfram Research. Otherwise, this seems to me to be like any NDA involving a technology company, and HN has seen discussions on over-broad NDAs recently. Finally, I'm not liking the quality of the Wikipedia article: I'd appreciate more information, and maybe links to court documents!
- alain94040 10y agoThe docket for the court case seems to be this one: https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/20370j96/illinois-central-district-court/wolfram-research-v-cook/ https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/20370j96/illinois-central-...
- pmiller2 10y agoCook's proof was presented at a conference in 1998 and published in 2000. NKS came out in 2002.
- pthreads 10y ago>Finally, I'm not liking the quality of the Wikipedia article: I'd appreciate more information, and maybe links to court documents! It's Wikipedia! If you are not liking the quality then feel free to edit it and make it better.
- CaliforniaKarl 10y agoThat's true! But I didn't have any additional information to add, so my edits would likely reduce the quality of the article. I don't have any experience in looking up court records.
- swayvil 10y agoWhen scientists chase dollars it's double-ugly.
- username223 10y agoFor any of you who haven't read it, Cosma Shalizi's review of ANKoS seems relevant: http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/ http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/