3 ms·
Thank you for this. I don’t see many generous readings of Wolframs writings. HN is very dismissive of almost everything of his that ever makes the front page.
by diego898 4y ago
Thank you for this. I don’t see many generous readings of Wolframs writings. HN is very dismissive of almost everything of his that ever makes the front page.
As someone who doesn’t know enough to really know if he’s right or wrong, it’s hard to fully believe the HN view that he’s a transparent Charleston (and easy to spot at that) considering his history.
It’s helpful to see a “positive” read of him and gives me more to think about so thank you!
Can you link/mention the podcast?
- mellosouls 4y agoI don’t see many generous readings of Wolframs writings. HN is very dismissive of almost everything of his that ever makes the front page. This sounds like the scepticism here is unfair. You need to consider that if somebody establishes a reputation for using their reasonably well-known (and justifiably respected) position as an academic software developer to publicise dubious and grandiose scientific theories to gullible techies and pop-sci readers, rather than submitting them to be evaluated by experts through the normal scientific process, it seems pretty miniscule beer in comparison to have some pushback in threads like this.
- nautilius 4y agoHe was recently on Tim Ferris and discussed his ideas.
- User23 4y agoIt’s not that hard to understand why the lisp guy who became a billionaire by making m-expressions work, but kept the tech proprietary, is resented by many here. Who else has ever achieved that level of success on the back of a programming language, let alone a Lisp? Our host here is the only one in the same ballpark and his success was more on the application side. Arc is no Wolfram language.
- frob 4y agoHonestly, this is the first time I've ever heard of m-expressions. I know of Wolfram from Mathematica and he has HUGE credit in my mind for building that.