
Stephen Wolfram's History of Not Playing Well with Others - jorgenveisdal
https://medium.com/cantors-paradise/richard-feynmans-advice-to-a-young-stephen-wolfram-1985-d572dc360c18
======
loceng
The interview, discussion, involving Eric Weinstein and Wolfram was insightful
in regards to how Wolfram dismisses and treats others.

"Stephen Wolfram & Eric Weinstein: The Nature of Mathematical Reality" \-
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI0AZ4Y4Ip4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI0AZ4Y4Ip4)

~~~
sjg007
I think Stephen was pretty patient here. Weinstein went off on a tangent and
moved away from the conversation into the politics of it. Wolfram was more
focused on the science. Now the problem is that nobody else is studying the
same thing in the same way... Wolfram is the only one doing the Science. So
Wolfram's issue is that nobody is running CAs to study the same phenomena so
the discussions are kinda of mute.

------
srtjstjsj
If like to turn it around and ask for examples of wildly people who DO okay
well with others.

~~~
Barrin92
Von Neumann generally had a reputation for being jovial and humorous and good
company, and he was without a doubt one of the brightest people of the last
century. Edward Teller remarked: _" von Neumann would carry on a conversation
with my 3-year-old son, and the two of them would talk as equals, and I
sometimes wondered if he used the same principle when he talked to the rest of
us"_

------
sjg007
Wolfram is underrated I think. He's got a small army working on CA and the
implications. He's also been working on CA for a long time! I believe that CA
are interesting and underrated. Just as we underestimated neural networks and
I think CA have fallen into a similar categorization. CAs are an array of
cells (that are finite state machines) whose neighbors determine it's output.
Sounds similar to a deep neural network to me!

~~~
sjg007
To expand on this, you have say the elementary subparticles that interact and
at some point form an electrons, protons and neutrons. Those particles then
follow another set of rules (or maybe the same set) in some way to produce
atoms.. and so and and so forth.

------
canada_dry
Obligatory: [https://outline.com/RfpK9k](https://outline.com/RfpK9k)

> "You won't enjoy administrating people because you won't succeed in it. You
> don't understand "ordinary people". To you they are "stupid fools"\--so you
> will not tolerate them or treat their foibles with tolerance or patience--
> but will drive yourself wild (or they will drive you wild) trying to deal
> with them in an effective way.Find a way to do you own research with as
> little contact with non-technical people as possible"

Feynman's gift really was understanding things and then being able to
communication the concept to people in a succinct and understandable way. This
is a rare example of peer-to-peer advice where he understood his own foible.

