3 ms·

This is what locking yourself away in an ivory tower gets you. Do things ‘for beauty’ and watch as they are automated and commoditized by the people who depend

This is what locking yourself away in an ivory tower gets you. Do things ‘for beauty’ and watch as they are automated and commoditized by the people who depend on them for their continued wellbeing, reduced to a hobby or sport. But the reduction began when you yourself started putting more importance on your enjoyment of the process over the value being provided to your customers.

robotpepi 2mo ago
Exactly! I have some many colleagues who typically say that they do "math for the beauty" while holding permanent research positions funded by the state.
- tmhn2 2mo ago
  That seems OK to me. I'd rather live in a state that funds beauty than one that doesn't. Think grants for artists, etc. A strictly practical world is not a good world to live in.
- Arodex 2mo ago
  Progress is made by these people - including progress you rely on heavily as a programmer, such as cryptography. Not by the industry.
  - NitpickLawyer 2mo ago
    > Progress is made by these people [...] Not by the industry. Eh, debatable? Maybe a bit of both? Industry certainly brings research-level stuff to the masses. And has a way to winnow what's ultimately useful from the vast amounts of research that amounts to "huh, that's weird". And in turn that vast amount of stuff serves as the starting point, and round and round it goes. Research without industry would be pointless (from the masses perspective). And industry without research would be clueless or stagnant or outright dangerous. Industry can also bring vast amounts of money into research. Just look at the field of Machine Learning.
    - turing_curious 2mo ago
      [dead]
  - mike_hearn 2mo ago
    Cryptography has always been largely driven by industrial mathematicians. Elliptic curve cryptography spent years requiring commercial licenses because it was made practical by Certicom, who patented many of the core inventions. A lot of the work on homomorphic encryption was done by mathematicians at IBM. The DES standard was developed by IBM. RC4, RC5 and RC6, some of the earliest stream ciphers, was a commercial secret because it was developed by Ron Rivest at RSA Security. NTRU post-quantum crypto was developed as a commercial product from the start. Many of the earliest cryptosystems were developed commercially, like Enigma and Crypto AG. A lot of the crypto for mobile phone networks is/was commercial. Academia did contribute to the early stages of public key cryptography both integer factorization based and elliptic curve based, but given the extensive history of commercial mathematics this stuff would almost certainly have been invented even if there was no academic mathematics at all.
- fraboniface 2mo ago
  One could also see it this way: shouldn't the goal of society be to allow more and more people to do things for the beauty of it rather that producing ever more useless stuffs and destroy the planet on the way?
  - vouaobrasil 2mo ago
    [dead]
discreteevent 2mo ago
> But the reduction began when you yourself started putting more importance on your enjoyment of the process over the value being provided to your customers. Why would you make this comment? Is it envy? They were able to do things only some people can do. They enjoyed what they did and it provided value. Now the fun has been taken out of it and you seem to be saying that they deserve to have no fun? What should they have done? Prove theorems while whipping themselves in case they might have fun? Maybe it's a puritan thing? Customer value is the only value.
- knollimar 2mo ago
  Don't complain that you lose funding if you sacrifice utility for a cirlejerk around craftsmanship. I'm sure there's a programming equivalent. I believe theyre saying don't lose sight of the trees.
  - qsort 2mo ago
    Many of my friends are mathematicians, they are saying pretty much the same thing the article is saying. Unfortunately, even the "I have wondered if it is the express goal of these companies to make me kill myself" line I haven't heard for the first time today. I assure you they're not in it for the money, I make more than they do and hardcore math research is definitely harder than whatever the fuck it is that I do. I don't think that trying to be a little bit more understanding towards people who are obviously struggling would cost us that much.
    - skeledrew 2mo ago
      If they want to jump off a bridge or seppuku because discoveries with the potential of improving lives in some way are accelerating... well let me say no more.
      - vouaobrasil 2mo ago
        And what about the discoveries that are worsening lives like military appplications and people who'll use the tech to discover better weapons?
iahds9uasd 2mo ago
Customers? It's math. This is like a comment a golem built to raise the S&P 500 would write.
- koito17 2mo ago
  > This is like a comment a golem built to raise the S&P 500 would write. That's neoliberalism for you.
- consensus1 2mo ago
  If somebody is paying you to do something and someone else comes along that can do that thing much better than you and/or for less money you've got a problem. Whether or not you call the person paying that money a customer or use some other term the fundamental issue is the same.
- jbxntuehineoh 2mo ago
  just another pathetic case of terminal economicsbrain. sadly there's nothing to be done to help these people; it's best to just ignore them
tmhn2 2mo ago
It's important to remember that historically many advances have been made without "customer value" in mind. Indeed, freeing oneself from such concerns can open up unexpected avenues for discovery which only later provide "customer value".
cauch 2mo ago
But "value provided to your customer" is not in itself what the society need. Or at least, it is a matter of opinion and you can probably find theoretical situations where even you would admit that maximizing actions based on the customer needs is not a good thing. Same here: the value for the society may be more about "making art" than "being a cog in the paperclip factory".

robotpepi 2mo ago

Exactly! I have some many colleagues who typically say that they do "math for the beauty" while holding permanent research positions funded by the state.

tmhn2 2mo ago
That seems OK to me. I'd rather live in a state that funds beauty than one that doesn't. Think grants for artists, etc. A strictly practical world is not a good world to live in.
Arodex 2mo ago
Progress is made by these people - including progress you rely on heavily as a programmer, such as cryptography. Not by the industry.
- NitpickLawyer 2mo ago
  > Progress is made by these people [...] Not by the industry. Eh, debatable? Maybe a bit of both? Industry certainly brings research-level stuff to the masses. And has a way to winnow what's ultimately useful from the vast amounts of research that amounts to "huh, that's weird". And in turn that vast amount of stuff serves as the starting point, and round and round it goes. Research without industry would be pointless (from the masses perspective). And industry without research would be clueless or stagnant or outright dangerous. Industry can also bring vast amounts of money into research. Just look at the field of Machine Learning.
  - turing_curious 2mo ago
    [dead]
- mike_hearn 2mo ago
  Cryptography has always been largely driven by industrial mathematicians. Elliptic curve cryptography spent years requiring commercial licenses because it was made practical by Certicom, who patented many of the core inventions. A lot of the work on homomorphic encryption was done by mathematicians at IBM. The DES standard was developed by IBM. RC4, RC5 and RC6, some of the earliest stream ciphers, was a commercial secret because it was developed by Ron Rivest at RSA Security. NTRU post-quantum crypto was developed as a commercial product from the start. Many of the earliest cryptosystems were developed commercially, like Enigma and Crypto AG. A lot of the crypto for mobile phone networks is/was commercial. Academia did contribute to the early stages of public key cryptography both integer factorization based and elliptic curve based, but given the extensive history of commercial mathematics this stuff would almost certainly have been invented even if there was no academic mathematics at all.
fraboniface 2mo ago
One could also see it this way: shouldn't the goal of society be to allow more and more people to do things for the beauty of it rather that producing ever more useless stuffs and destroy the planet on the way?
- vouaobrasil 2mo ago
  [dead]

discreteevent 2mo ago

> But the reduction began when you yourself started putting more importance on your enjoyment of the process over the value being provided to your customers. Why would you make this comment? Is it envy? They were able to do things only some people can do. They enjoyed what they did and it provided value. Now the fun has been taken out of it and you seem to be saying that they deserve to have no fun? What should they have done? Prove theorems while whipping themselves in case they might have fun? Maybe it's a puritan thing? Customer value is the only value.

knollimar 2mo ago
Don't complain that you lose funding if you sacrifice utility for a cirlejerk around craftsmanship. I'm sure there's a programming equivalent. I believe theyre saying don't lose sight of the trees.
- qsort 2mo ago
  Many of my friends are mathematicians, they are saying pretty much the same thing the article is saying. Unfortunately, even the "I have wondered if it is the express goal of these companies to make me kill myself" line I haven't heard for the first time today. I assure you they're not in it for the money, I make more than they do and hardcore math research is definitely harder than whatever the fuck it is that I do. I don't think that trying to be a little bit more understanding towards people who are obviously struggling would cost us that much.
  - skeledrew 2mo ago
    If they want to jump off a bridge or seppuku because discoveries with the potential of improving lives in some way are accelerating... well let me say no more.
    - vouaobrasil 2mo ago
      And what about the discoveries that are worsening lives like military appplications and people who'll use the tech to discover better weapons?

iahds9uasd 2mo ago

Customers? It's math. This is like a comment a golem built to raise the S&P 500 would write.

koito17 2mo ago
> This is like a comment a golem built to raise the S&P 500 would write. That's neoliberalism for you.
consensus1 2mo ago
If somebody is paying you to do something and someone else comes along that can do that thing much better than you and/or for less money you've got a problem. Whether or not you call the person paying that money a customer or use some other term the fundamental issue is the same.
jbxntuehineoh 2mo ago
just another pathetic case of terminal economicsbrain. sadly there's nothing to be done to help these people; it's best to just ignore them

tmhn2 2mo ago

It's important to remember that historically many advances have been made without "customer value" in mind. Indeed, freeing oneself from such concerns can open up unexpected avenues for discovery which only later provide "customer value".

cauch 2mo ago

But "value provided to your customer" is not in itself what the society need. Or at least, it is a matter of opinion and you can probably find theoretical situations where even you would admit that maximizing actions based on the customer needs is not a good thing. Same here: the value for the society may be more about "making art" than "being a cog in the paperclip factory".