4 ms·

Kind of a side note, but Stephen Wolfram really has a way to make things about himself.

BeetleB 6y ago
For many years, this annoyed me. Now, though, I enjoy it. At least he is someone of note.
arduinomancer 6y ago
How is that your takeaway from the article? There’s a lot of interesting anecdotes/history here. He spent quite a lot of time just talking about Golomb and his work.
- ganafagol 6y ago
  An obituary where the author casually drops that he was the youngest receiver of this-and-that award? That everything becomes so easy with the Wolfram Language? That he's written a new kind of science book and casts Golomb's work as essentially a precursor for his great accomplishments about cellular automata? Wolfram is slowly transforming into the Trump of computer science. Soon he'll cast turing machines as just a small precursor of himself having solved computation.
  - protastus 6y ago
    Every single article I've read by Wolfram makes detours to focus on his own accomplishments (e.g. awards or appointments), tied to the main story by extremely tenuous, almost non-existent connections. And there are always multiple references to cellular automata. I will gladly admit I like his storytelling and the anecdotes are interesting but I have to ignore the detours to make it to the end.
  - codeproject 6y ago
    don't be so harsh on the old man. He indeed accomplished a lot. A little bit self-promotion is generally Ok. What did Steve Jobs actually do technically?
  - tzs 6y ago
    > An obituary where the author casually drops that he was the youngest receiver of this-and-that award? It's more a eulogy than an obituary. It is common in eulogies for the speaker/writer to explain how the subject's life tied in with their own. His being the youngest winner in the first batch of MacArthur awards is completely relevant because that was why Astrid Golomb came knocking on his door. > That everything becomes so easy with the Wolfram Language? He gave one specific example as something that is easy nowadays on computers that Golomb had to do tediously be hand when he needed it in 1954. Nowhere does he say anything about the Wolfram Language making everything easier.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
matsemann 6y ago
"Surely you're joking mr Feynman" is the same, but there it is celebrated. So I think if it's ok depends on if you have the same level of admiration for the writer as the writer does for himself.
- chewbaxxa 6y ago
  That’s an autobiography. You read it to hear the author talk about themselves.
  - matsemann 6y ago
    That's missing my point, though. I'm not saying it's wrong for Feynman talking about himself, but that the way he does it isn't much different from Wolfram.
    - westoncb 6y ago
      It's pretty different. If nothing else, it's playful with Feynman—almost done in jest as an aspect of the rogue part he often played, and largely innocuous. Others have already written about the issues with e.g. New Kind of Science at length so I won't go into it, but if you look at the specifics there and ask whether they're things Feynman might also have done, it's easy to see the resemblance is pretty superficial. Feynman's non-autobiographical writing was pretty down to earth imo.
    - user-the-name 6y ago
      Feynmann doesn't do it in an obituary, is the point.
kybernetikos 6y ago
I wish we had an automatic sticky on all Stephen Wolfram posts to not talk about his self-aggrandising tendencies. It's not that I don't agree that he does it, it's just that moaning about it happens on nearly 100% of hackernews comment threads about his content, and it's generally much much less interesting than the usually very interesting content.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

For many years, this annoyed me. Now, though, I enjoy it. At least he is someone of note.

How is that your takeaway from the article? There’s a lot of interesting anecdotes/history here. He spent quite a lot of time just talking about Golomb and his work.

ganafagol 6y ago
An obituary where the author casually drops that he was the youngest receiver of this-and-that award? That everything becomes so easy with the Wolfram Language? That he's written a new kind of science book and casts Golomb's work as essentially a precursor for his great accomplishments about cellular automata? Wolfram is slowly transforming into the Trump of computer science. Soon he'll cast turing machines as just a small precursor of himself having solved computation.
- protastus 6y ago
  Every single article I've read by Wolfram makes detours to focus on his own accomplishments (e.g. awards or appointments), tied to the main story by extremely tenuous, almost non-existent connections. And there are always multiple references to cellular automata. I will gladly admit I like his storytelling and the anecdotes are interesting but I have to ignore the detours to make it to the end.
- codeproject 6y ago
  don't be so harsh on the old man. He indeed accomplished a lot. A little bit self-promotion is generally Ok. What did Steve Jobs actually do technically?
- tzs 6y ago
  > An obituary where the author casually drops that he was the youngest receiver of this-and-that award? It's more a eulogy than an obituary. It is common in eulogies for the speaker/writer to explain how the subject's life tied in with their own. His being the youngest winner in the first batch of MacArthur awards is completely relevant because that was why Astrid Golomb came knocking on his door. > That everything becomes so easy with the Wolfram Language? He gave one specific example as something that is easy nowadays on computers that Golomb had to do tediously be hand when he needed it in 1954. Nowhere does he say anything about the Wolfram Language making everything easier.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

matsemann 6y ago

"Surely you're joking mr Feynman" is the same, but there it is celebrated. So I think if it's ok depends on if you have the same level of admiration for the writer as the writer does for himself.

chewbaxxa 6y ago
That’s an autobiography. You read it to hear the author talk about themselves.
- matsemann 6y ago
  That's missing my point, though. I'm not saying it's wrong for Feynman talking about himself, but that the way he does it isn't much different from Wolfram.
  - westoncb 6y ago
    It's pretty different. If nothing else, it's playful with Feynman—almost done in jest as an aspect of the rogue part he often played, and largely innocuous. Others have already written about the issues with e.g. New Kind of Science at length so I won't go into it, but if you look at the specifics there and ask whether they're things Feynman might also have done, it's easy to see the resemblance is pretty superficial. Feynman's non-autobiographical writing was pretty down to earth imo.
  - user-the-name 6y ago
    Feynmann doesn't do it in an obituary, is the point.

kybernetikos 6y ago

I wish we had an automatic sticky on all Stephen Wolfram posts to not talk about his self-aggrandising tendencies. It's not that I don't agree that he does it, it's just that moaning about it happens on nearly 100% of hackernews comment threads about his content, and it's generally much much less interesting than the usually very interesting content.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]