5 ms·

I started my career at Bell Labs in the 80's and one engineer there made a huge impact on me. I learned more from him that any other single person I have worked

I started my career at Bell Labs in the 80's and one engineer there made a huge impact on me. I learned more from him that any other single person I have worked with since. He suffered from progressive myopia so he had a rig with a camera and a big screen and a huge monitor. He coded slower than everyone else, but in a way, that was his secret power because his code almost never failed in testing. Also, he was brilliant and I learned more about hardware and software from him that I did in Masters EE program. Also, he had this insight about the balance between when to use hardware and when to use software that I think is somewhat lacking today (discussion for another day). A lot of people have said that he was the inspiration for the character in the movie Sneakers (Whistler) could be he was really well know but passed away some time ago. I recall a time when we had a big meeting with a lot of executives and he had long hair and a beard and after the meeting one of the big wigs said to me "who is the guys that looks like Jesus, he is a genius". Sorry that I am going on a bit, I cannot even begin to understand what you are going through, but I can tell you that you should not underestimate the impact you can have on others. I wish I had better words here, I wish I knew more about what to suggest to help you technically, but all I know is that someone dealing something with something similar to you meant a great deal to me personally and professionally. Best wishes.

Endlessly 7y ago
Meat of your comment to me is this phrase, “he had this insight about the balance between when to use hardware and when to use software that I think is somewhat lacking today” - would you attempt to clarify what you’re expressing he would have said about balancing the design of how software & hardware work together? Thanks.
- Vinceo 7y ago
  I'm interested in hearing more about that as well.
  - gautamcgoel 7y ago
    Me too.
- zw123456 7y ago
  Sorry I have not been monitoring this. Here is what I learned back then. What we were working on was an automated system to monitor data circuits, which back then were basically modems connected to a dedicated audio circuit. They called it a private line data circuit. The problem back then of course was that you essentially needed a way to sample the audio modem circuit and do analysis of it. We had written some code on a Symbolics computer that could do the analysis (that was the old timey LISP type AI computer). The trick was how to get the samples without a person having to jack in and record it or whatever. Today this seems trivial but it was more complicated back then. We brainstormed on it (he had a sharp ear BTW). We ended up building a device that had some custom hardware on it that then interfaced the ADC over DMA to a 68000 processor and could monitor multiple circuits etc. and fed that to the Symbolics which could predict all sorts of things. Anyhow, it taught me how you could sort of combine the two to offload some stuff to HW but still keep the flexibility of SW. I see a lot of similar types of trade offs today. Now of course we have FPGA's for hardware that can do a lot but you still need interface circuitry to the real world depending on the application. I have worked on a lot of projects where there is a tendency to always reach for software or vice versa. What I think happens is you might have a company let's say company 'G' that is basically a software company and everyone they hire knows software really well. And they interview and hire more software people. Then if they were to let's say... buy a company that makes HW, perhaps phones, they have a difficult time. Or they try to build out a network and struggle. Then maybe you have another company 'V' and they are good at building a network but they don't understand software so if they buy a software company it is difficult for them. Then you have a company Apple that has always done both and they seem to make better choices. I am sure a lot of you out there can think of similar examples. This is just my observations based on my experiences. The more a team has a diverse set of experiences and background (HW, SW, Network) the better the chance of getting an optimal solution.
- ozim 7y ago
  I think now it would be comparable to having good clue which workload should be server side vs which workload should be client side in web dev. Back end devs want to do all on back end and front end guys want to do all in front end. Then you get issues like API returning too much data that someone can abuse or hundreds of calls with ajax to setup something....
richrichardsson 7y ago
I always assumed Whistler in Sneakers was a reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joybubbles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joybubbles
- hoistbypetard 7y ago
  I did as well. I can't find a reference at the moment, but I'm almost positive the authors of the screenplay said as much in the early 90s.
  - zw123456 7y ago
    I am sure you are right, everyone on HN is always right about everything :) Probably those of us that loved Louie just felt like he was like that.
racl101 7y ago
> but in a way, that was his secret power because his code almost never failed in testing. Reminds me of the stories about Stephen Hawking and how it seemed like he was just sitting there miserable but he instead he was thinking very deeply and how his disabilities forced him to be able to think visually in his mind and compensate because he would only get a quick chance to absorb input.
downerending 7y ago
> coded slower [...] his code almost never failed in testing. Huh. I've had this most of my career as well, especially in the latter years. I do consider this a secret power, but many of my colleagues (especially the younger ones) view it as a fault.
- zw123456 7y ago
  Me too, I have always been slower, not a fault at all. If you code slow and make fewer mistakes then you may end up being faster in the end than someone who cranks it out but has to redo it 3 times when problems are found in testing. Of course there are I am sure super programs who can do both, but I haven't seen one yet.
hollander 7y ago
That 80s guy sounds like a genius, but this guy is probably not, like most of us. He may be intelligent and hardworking, but a genius is on a different level. Another thing is that progressive myopia is something different than going completely blind and deaf. That is this guy's fate. How do you communicate then?

Endlessly 7y ago

Meat of your comment to me is this phrase, “he had this insight about the balance between when to use hardware and when to use software that I think is somewhat lacking today” - would you attempt to clarify what you’re expressing he would have said about balancing the design of how software & hardware work together? Thanks.

Vinceo 7y ago
I'm interested in hearing more about that as well.
- gautamcgoel 7y ago
  Me too.
zw123456 7y ago
Sorry I have not been monitoring this. Here is what I learned back then. What we were working on was an automated system to monitor data circuits, which back then were basically modems connected to a dedicated audio circuit. They called it a private line data circuit. The problem back then of course was that you essentially needed a way to sample the audio modem circuit and do analysis of it. We had written some code on a Symbolics computer that could do the analysis (that was the old timey LISP type AI computer). The trick was how to get the samples without a person having to jack in and record it or whatever. Today this seems trivial but it was more complicated back then. We brainstormed on it (he had a sharp ear BTW). We ended up building a device that had some custom hardware on it that then interfaced the ADC over DMA to a 68000 processor and could monitor multiple circuits etc. and fed that to the Symbolics which could predict all sorts of things. Anyhow, it taught me how you could sort of combine the two to offload some stuff to HW but still keep the flexibility of SW. I see a lot of similar types of trade offs today. Now of course we have FPGA's for hardware that can do a lot but you still need interface circuitry to the real world depending on the application. I have worked on a lot of projects where there is a tendency to always reach for software or vice versa. What I think happens is you might have a company let's say company 'G' that is basically a software company and everyone they hire knows software really well. And they interview and hire more software people. Then if they were to let's say... buy a company that makes HW, perhaps phones, they have a difficult time. Or they try to build out a network and struggle. Then maybe you have another company 'V' and they are good at building a network but they don't understand software so if they buy a software company it is difficult for them. Then you have a company Apple that has always done both and they seem to make better choices. I am sure a lot of you out there can think of similar examples. This is just my observations based on my experiences. The more a team has a diverse set of experiences and background (HW, SW, Network) the better the chance of getting an optimal solution.
ozim 7y ago
I think now it would be comparable to having good clue which workload should be server side vs which workload should be client side in web dev. Back end devs want to do all on back end and front end guys want to do all in front end. Then you get issues like API returning too much data that someone can abuse or hundreds of calls with ajax to setup something....

richrichardsson 7y ago

I always assumed Whistler in Sneakers was a reference to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joybubbles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joybubbles

hoistbypetard 7y ago
I did as well. I can't find a reference at the moment, but I'm almost positive the authors of the screenplay said as much in the early 90s.
- zw123456 7y ago
  I am sure you are right, everyone on HN is always right about everything :) Probably those of us that loved Louie just felt like he was like that.

racl101 7y ago

> but in a way, that was his secret power because his code almost never failed in testing. Reminds me of the stories about Stephen Hawking and how it seemed like he was just sitting there miserable but he instead he was thinking very deeply and how his disabilities forced him to be able to think visually in his mind and compensate because he would only get a quick chance to absorb input.

downerending 7y ago

> coded slower [...] his code almost never failed in testing. Huh. I've had this most of my career as well, especially in the latter years. I do consider this a secret power, but many of my colleagues (especially the younger ones) view it as a fault.

zw123456 7y ago
Me too, I have always been slower, not a fault at all. If you code slow and make fewer mistakes then you may end up being faster in the end than someone who cranks it out but has to redo it 3 times when problems are found in testing. Of course there are I am sure super programs who can do both, but I haven't seen one yet.

hollander 7y ago

That 80s guy sounds like a genius, but this guy is probably not, like most of us. He may be intelligent and hardworking, but a genius is on a different level. Another thing is that progressive myopia is something different than going completely blind and deaf. That is this guy's fate. How do you communicate then?