3 ms·
I'm impressed it took Wolfram until the third paragraph to mention A New Kind of Science.
by weavejester 16y ago
I'm impressed it took Wolfram until the third paragraph to mention A New Kind of Science.
- ionfish 16y agoWhenever anyone mentions NKS I'm always reminded of Cosma Shalizi's brilliant and hilarious review, 'A Rare Blend of Monster Raving Egomania and Utter Batshit Insanity'. http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/reviews/wolfram/ http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/reviews/wolfram/
- zackattack 16y agoFrom the review: "[Wolfram] has talent, and once had some promise; he has squandered them". The creation of Mathematica counts as squandering?
- hga 16y agoFor "someone who was once a respectable physicist", yes. Especially to the extent he's putting resources into this instead of Mathematica. (Note: the above is from the author's (and others) point of view; I've not read the book and have no first hand opinion on it or Wolfram, besides the law-suit happy thing and such, e.g. I don't use Wolfram Alpha because they own whatever is the output of it, I don't and am restricted in how I can use it.)
- zackattack 16y agoI also thought it was kind of a dick move to wait until the end to admit that he didn't understand the symbols in principia_1b1.jpg. This is actually a pet peeve of mine in mathematics writing in general, introducing ambiguity and not resolving it until several pages or paragraphs later. It's really alienating. =(
- ionfish 16y agoClearly he should have read the SEP entry on this very subject, 'The Notation in Principia Mathematica'. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pm-notation/ http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pm-notation/
- ced 16y agoThe post by Wolfram is a great discussion of logic and the philosophy of mathematics throughout the 20th century. Yet the top comment on HN is a snark, tribal bashing of the author.
- wwortiz 16y agoThese snarks appear because of Wolfram's writing style, he comes off as a kind of Steve Jobs who he himself is the product he is selling. Though at least this one is lighter than usual.
- ced 16y agoThough at least this one is lighter than usual. That's the whole point. If you read it without thinking "Wolfram wrote this therefore it will be self-centered", then it sounds perfectly fine. The GP's snark was merely appealing to people's confirmation bias. It's a high-level version of that high-school classic: "I'll pick on that kid to show I'm part of the group". Besides, it's depressingly ironic that a community producing a deluge of "How my startup achieved X in Y months" complains about this post being self-centered. Read it! It's a good essay!
- stinkytaco 16y agoI, for one, feel its news when a raving egomaniac and lawsuit happy control freak like Wolfram doesn't sound like one. Indeed, I probably would not have read the article if someone hadn't pointed out he wasn't being an egomaniac. Your analogy works, except its Wolfram who does the bullying, not the other way around.
- weavejester 16y agoI don't particularly object to Wolfram being self-centered. Nor is there anything wrong with advertising one's own achievements. But Wolfram seems incapable of talking about any subject without shoehorning in some reference to his own works. Even when expected, it's a jarring, unnecessary interruption; a wild swing from a reasonably interesting article on mathematical history to unabashed self-promotion. The snark wasn't intended as an offering to Hacker New group-think, but rather borne out of a genuine frustration at Wolfram's style of writing. I find it very difficult to read anything he says, because I'm continually awaiting that moment when he will pause, smile cheesily at the proverbial camera, and explain how amazing his products are.