6 ms·

This paragraph sounds like classic Wolfram/Kurzweil egotism: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/magazine/the-professor-the-bikini-model-and-the-suitcase-full-of-

by seiji 14y ago

This paragraph sounds like classic Wolfram/Kurzweil egotism: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/magazine/the-professor-the-bikini-model-and-the-suitcase-full-of-trouble.html?hp#p%5BAFtAia%5D http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/magazine/the-professor-the... Personality is a vector. Just because you are really high up on technical smarts means nothing in regard to the rest of you. We could simplify it down to a minimal [technical-smarts world] vector where at an extreme end you could have [100 0] being "brilliant, but forgot to wear pants to work today" to [0 100] being "the friendliest, most amazing person you'll ever meet, but they can't work a toaster." Few people are a Feynman. Most of us manage to be midline boring enough we wouldn't make interesting NYT articles. But, more interestingly, never underestimate the ability of a smart person to seem dumber than they are for their own benefit. We honestly can't tell if he's a rube, a conman, or a mark.

harshreality 14y ago
Do you really think a personality vector (space) basis is close to two-dimensional, or was that a drastically simplified example? I don't think [IQ EQ] comes close to accurately describing personality. Plenty of people who have poor inter-personal skills and "emotional intelligence" would still not be caught dead transporting someone else's luggage in that situation.
- seiji 14y ago
  Oh, not at all. I didn't want to clutter things with a detailed dozen to hundred dimensional example. A good intro to various (small, 7 to 10 dimensional) standard bases of personality descriptors is Making Sense of People: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0050JKCI6 http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0050JKCI6 Plus, some of the attributes depend on the person observing. People have widely varying likability based on who they are around. (e.g. "knows how to comfort me when I'm sad" or "quality of goodnight hug" or "their voice makes me want to tape their mouth shut and throw them in an active volcano")
IvyMike 14y ago
Having read the whole story, I can't help but think that he knew he was transporting drugs, but was duped into thinking he was doing it for the real Milani. Like all the best movie cons, you make the mark believe they're on the inside, but they're really not. Getting back to the egotism: This is speculation, but I think his thought process on the drug smuggling probably went like this: "I'm so much smarter than everyone else I've ever met, of COURSE I will get away with it, especially with my airtight excuse if I am caught." This kind of reminds me of Hans Reiser, whose egotism and belief in his own superiority was also his downfall.
- api 14y ago
  This is the origin of "you can't con an honest man." I was a victim of a very weird kind of con once, and I'm not ashamed to admit that my ego played a huge role in getting me to fall for it. Con men play to the mark's ego because because it works! (Luckily in my case I escaped with little loss, and didn't end up in an Argentine jail.)
  - addlepate 14y ago
    You should probably be ashamed of that, at least a little bit. I would.
  - kbenson 14y ago
    > you can't con an honest man. Unfortunately it's not true. There are a number of cons that apply towards people wanting to do the right thing (and usually mixing a bit of greed in as well), to make the pull twice as hard to resist. Check out the Glim-dropper scam[1]. I've heard it described in multiple variations (diamond ring at a gas station, wallet on the street, etc). Importantly, the mark is both making money, and providing help to someone who needs it. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_confidence_tricks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_confidence_tricks
    - itsybitsycoder 14y ago
      But in this scenario, an honest person would tell the finder about the reward and give him the contact info. It only works if the shopkeeper gets greedy and keeps the reward a secret.
javert 14y ago
He was getting paid well as a professor with an endowed chair at a major research university. He has no motive to smuggle drugs. He was the victim here.
- tomkarlo 14y ago
  There's some aspect of his personal finances that's been glossed over here... it's pretty clear that despite decades of income he didn't have much in the way of assets to use to pay for his defense. (One would think you'd sell anything you own if it means avoiding a prolonged stay in a South American jail.) Maybe it was the divorce, or something else, but he doesn't seem to have a great financial situation.
  - arvinjoar 14y ago
    Another possibility is that he was looking for some FU money? He felt very highly of himself, perhaps he felt he was being held back and wanted a bit more freedom. Pure speculation of course.
    - tomkarlo 14y ago
      Definitely possible. I was just replying to the suggestion that he had "no motive" to smuggle drugs. $400K (and tax-free) is a lot of motive, even if you have substantial savings. Martha Stewart was worth millions and ended up in jail over what, $250K?
- smsm42 14y ago
  That's like saying millionaire could not possibly commit fraud - he already has a million! Madoff's case provides ample proof to the contrary, to say nothing of other people operating the finance industry.
- jwoah12 14y ago
  He was obsessed with marrying this woman, and if he thought smuggling drugs for her would win her over, that seems like motive to me.
- 14y ago
microtherion 14y ago
Actually, Feynman might not be the best scientist role model to hold up for all-around common sense and decent behavior, particularly where relationships with women are concerned.
- snowwrestler 14y ago
  He's a great counter-example to stereotype of the absent-minded or socially awkward genius. He was the rare combination of genius level scientist with powerful personal charisma.
- Tichy 14y ago
  Were women unhappy with him?
  - microtherion 14y ago
    Oh yes! One of the anecdotes I remember from James Gleick’s _Genius_ was that one of Feynman’s ex-girlfriends kidnapped some memento of his nobel prize to get him to apologize (sorry, a bit hazy on the details, it’s been more than 15 years since I read that).
  - tzs 14y ago
    It's a bit complicated. From a talk by Danny Hillis [1]: ------ The charming side of Richard helped people forgive him for his uncharming characteristics. For example, in many ways Richard was a sexist. Whenever it came time for his daily bowl of soup he would look around for the nearest "girl" and ask if she would fetch it to him. It did not matter if she was the cook, an engineer, or the president of the company. I once asked a female engineer who had just been a victim of this if it bothered her. "Yes, it really annoys me," she said. "On the other hand, he is the only one who ever explained quantum mechanics to me as if I could understand it." That was the essence of Richard's charm. ------ [1] http://longnow.org/essays/richard-feynman-connection-machine/ http://longnow.org/essays/richard-feynman-connection-machine...
    - varjag 14y ago

by seiji 14y ago

harshreality 14y ago

Do you really think a personality vector (space) basis is close to two-dimensional, or was that a drastically simplified example? I don't think [IQ EQ] comes close to accurately describing personality. Plenty of people who have poor inter-personal skills and "emotional intelligence" would still not be caught dead transporting someone else's luggage in that situation.

seiji 14y ago
Oh, not at all. I didn't want to clutter things with a detailed dozen to hundred dimensional example. A good intro to various (small, 7 to 10 dimensional) standard bases of personality descriptors is Making Sense of People: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0050JKCI6 http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0050JKCI6 Plus, some of the attributes depend on the person observing. People have widely varying likability based on who they are around. (e.g. "knows how to comfort me when I'm sad" or "quality of goodnight hug" or "their voice makes me want to tape their mouth shut and throw them in an active volcano")

IvyMike 14y ago

Having read the whole story, I can't help but think that he knew he was transporting drugs, but was duped into thinking he was doing it for the real Milani. Like all the best movie cons, you make the mark believe they're on the inside, but they're really not. Getting back to the egotism: This is speculation, but I think his thought process on the drug smuggling probably went like this: "I'm so much smarter than everyone else I've ever met, of COURSE I will get away with it, especially with my airtight excuse if I am caught." This kind of reminds me of Hans Reiser, whose egotism and belief in his own superiority was also his downfall.

api 14y ago
This is the origin of "you can't con an honest man." I was a victim of a very weird kind of con once, and I'm not ashamed to admit that my ego played a huge role in getting me to fall for it. Con men play to the mark's ego because because it works! (Luckily in my case I escaped with little loss, and didn't end up in an Argentine jail.)
- addlepate 14y ago
  You should probably be ashamed of that, at least a little bit. I would.
- kbenson 14y ago
  > you can't con an honest man. Unfortunately it's not true. There are a number of cons that apply towards people wanting to do the right thing (and usually mixing a bit of greed in as well), to make the pull twice as hard to resist. Check out the Glim-dropper scam[1]. I've heard it described in multiple variations (diamond ring at a gas station, wallet on the street, etc). Importantly, the mark is both making money, and providing help to someone who needs it. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_confidence_tricks http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_confidence_tricks
  - itsybitsycoder 14y ago
    But in this scenario, an honest person would tell the finder about the reward and give him the contact info. It only works if the shopkeeper gets greedy and keeps the reward a secret.

javert 14y ago

He was getting paid well as a professor with an endowed chair at a major research university. He has no motive to smuggle drugs. He was the victim here.

tomkarlo 14y ago
There's some aspect of his personal finances that's been glossed over here... it's pretty clear that despite decades of income he didn't have much in the way of assets to use to pay for his defense. (One would think you'd sell anything you own if it means avoiding a prolonged stay in a South American jail.) Maybe it was the divorce, or something else, but he doesn't seem to have a great financial situation.
- arvinjoar 14y ago
  Another possibility is that he was looking for some FU money? He felt very highly of himself, perhaps he felt he was being held back and wanted a bit more freedom. Pure speculation of course.
  - tomkarlo 14y ago
    Definitely possible. I was just replying to the suggestion that he had "no motive" to smuggle drugs. $400K (and tax-free) is a lot of motive, even if you have substantial savings. Martha Stewart was worth millions and ended up in jail over what, $250K?
smsm42 14y ago
That's like saying millionaire could not possibly commit fraud - he already has a million! Madoff's case provides ample proof to the contrary, to say nothing of other people operating the finance industry.
jwoah12 14y ago
He was obsessed with marrying this woman, and if he thought smuggling drugs for her would win her over, that seems like motive to me.
14y ago

microtherion 14y ago

Actually, Feynman might not be the best scientist role model to hold up for all-around common sense and decent behavior, particularly where relationships with women are concerned.

snowwrestler 14y ago
He's a great counter-example to stereotype of the absent-minded or socially awkward genius. He was the rare combination of genius level scientist with powerful personal charisma.
Tichy 14y ago
Were women unhappy with him?
- microtherion 14y ago
  Oh yes! One of the anecdotes I remember from James Gleick’s _Genius_ was that one of Feynman’s ex-girlfriends kidnapped some memento of his nobel prize to get him to apologize (sorry, a bit hazy on the details, it’s been more than 15 years since I read that).
- tzs 14y ago
  It's a bit complicated. From a talk by Danny Hillis [1]: ------ The charming side of Richard helped people forgive him for his uncharming characteristics. For example, in many ways Richard was a sexist. Whenever it came time for his daily bowl of soup he would look around for the nearest "girl" and ask if she would fetch it to him. It did not matter if she was the cook, an engineer, or the president of the company. I once asked a female engineer who had just been a victim of this if it bothered her. "Yes, it really annoys me," she said. "On the other hand, he is the only one who ever explained quantum mechanics to me as if I could understand it." That was the essence of Richard's charm. ------ [1] http://longnow.org/essays/richard-feynman-connection-machine/ http://longnow.org/essays/richard-feynman-connection-machine...
  - varjag 14y ago