
"You Don't Understand Ordinary People" - Feynman Gives Advice to Wolfram - JoelSutherland
http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/06/you-dont-understand-ordinary-people.html
======
sbierwagen
Wolfram is damn smart. I'll give him that.

He also made a pile of money on Mathematica. I'll give him that as well. It
was classic "solve your own problem" entrepreneurship. He needed a better
computer algebra program, so he wrote one, then started selling it.[1]

But he's a crank. He wrote a couple good papers in the 80s, then hasn't done
anything decent since. He published A New Kind Of Science in 2002, which was
supposed to change the world; except that half of it was nonsense and the
other half was stolen from other people.
(<http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/reviews/wolfram/>)

Feynnman (kinda) calls him out on this: Complexity research doesn't need its
own institute, because complexity research is a pseudoscience that means
whatever you want it to mean, like how the homepathy quacks have latched on to
the word "quantum".

1: Wolfram Alpha is the same thing. Wolfram wanted a natural language parser,
so he wrote one. Except it doesn't work worth a damn, because natural language
parsing is a hideously difficult problem, which probably requires strong AI.

~~~
bitsai
Thanks for the link to Cosma Shalizi's review of A New Kind of Science; I
greatly enjoyed it. I'm also quite fond of this Amazon review:

<http://www.amazon.com/review/R6B8KO2M32P8G>

~~~
pfedor
One thing to keep in mind is that probably all the bashing of "A New Kind of
Science" has more to do with the perception of Wolfram being arrogant or self-
centered than with actual merits (or lack of them) of the book.

------
F_J_H
My favorite Wolfram "dig" went something along the lines of: "The question is
who will become self aware first: Wolfram or Wolfram Alpha.", eluding to the
fact that apparently he is pretty impressed with himself and happy to share
it. Can't remember who said it though. Anyway, this post just made me remember
it.

------
ErrantX
The bit I particularly like is the fact that Feynman was also one of the great
minds who _did_ understand ordinary people.

I regularly dig out his lectures on pop-physics for a refresher :D

~~~
mistermann
Exactly....I swear Feynman could have encountered the proverbial pig farmer
and talked for several hours and left, and if someone told the farmer who they
were talking to later, they wouldn't believe them, they'd just say he was an
extremely interesting guy. He could find interesting things about almost any
subject, and get everyone excited about them.

------
teilo
Classic Feynman: "with one exception, fall madly in love!"

~~~
albertcardona
Someone once said that madness was necessary for creating. Does anybody know
who it was? Can't find it.

~~~
BRadmin
It's interesting because Wolfram quotes Feynman as saying:

"Peace of mind is the most important prerequisite for creative work."

<http://www.stephenwolfram.com/publications/recent/feynman/>

~~~
JCThoughtscream
Peace of mind can just as easily be interpreted as "comfort within one's
madness."

------
T_S_
That was a priceless post. Turns out Feynman was wrong on one thing though.
Wolfram does like being the boss. Possibly very much.

~~~
kunley
Wolfram learned to like it in the process..

~~~
dhs
Citation, please.

~~~
arebop
The impression I got from this talk:
[http://www.stephenwolfram.com/publications/recent/ycombinato...](http://www.stephenwolfram.com/publications/recent/ycombinatorschool/)
is that he became a businessman reluctantly.

~~~
T_S_
I don't read reluctance into those comments at all. Just look at the comments
on personnel management. It's clear he likes it. The early remarks about the
"stupid decisions" being made at the first company are a clear sign. Most
business leaders know it's culturally not cool to talk like they enjoy
leadership. To me, Wolfram went to the _enfant terrible_ school of management.
At least he turned out to be competent enough to last.

~~~
spot
you make it sound like a good thing.

~~~
T_S_
Which thing?

------
pedoh
If you haven't read any of Richard Feynman's books, I highly recommend them.
They're not only fascinating, but with a wonderful sense of humor, as well. I
particularly love the chapter in "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" about
his safecracking exploits. Not only did it show his physical skills and
dexterity, but his ability to do social engineering, as well. Great stuff.

In "What Do You Care What Other People Think?" he talks a lot about the
investigation into the Challenger explosion. Amazing writing on such a serious
topic, in my opinion.

------
jackfoxy
Feynman is one of my few heroes. This is an interesting situation. Feynman was
right and Wolfram did what he wanted and was successful. Perhaps by taking
Feynman's advice to heart. Who knows?

~~~
reitzensteinm
The advice was good; however, you can take a path that is not sensible yet
succeed by sheer willpower, huge amounts of luck or to a lesser extent great
ability.

Advice like this is intended to maximize the probability of success. To put it
into a HN familiar example, don't be a single founder because single founders
are x% less likely to succeed. The fact that single founders can and do
succeed all the time does not make the advice bad, it just shows it to be the
generalization that it is.

------
rntz
I'd like to see a transcript of the letter this was written in response to.

~~~
abstractbill
Here's both letters: <http://elzr.com/posts/wolfram-feynman>

~~~
arketyp
"Wolfram did not follow Feynman's advice. Not only did he establish an
institute but he also founded the company Wolfram Research, makers of the
widely used Mathematica software system. Contrary to Feynman’s expectation
Wolfram has been a successful CEO for many years. Within this environment he
has managed to pursue ambitious directions in basic science, particularly
through his 2002 book A New Kind of Science. He has also been happily married
since the early 1990s."

------
danbmil99
The NKS seminars and forums Wolfram has tried to create are exactly the sort
of thing he said he wanted to do back then. They are weak institutions because
they are dominated by him and his ideas; they're like a debating society in
North Korea. Maybe you'll get a new angle on how awesome is the Glorious
Leader, but there will be no surprises.

------
mcav
What does the "RPF;ht" at the bottom stand for? (I vaguely recall this being
an old convention of something?)

~~~
kscaldef
'ht' is Helen Tuck, the secretary at Caltech's Theory Group for many years;
that mark indicates she typed the letter. I was there many years after Feynman
passed away, but I have fond memories of Helen and some of the stories she had
to tell about the "old days".

~~~
mturmon
[http://pr.caltech.edu/periodicals/336/articles/Volume%202/05...](http://pr.caltech.edu/periodicals/336/articles/Volume%202/05-16-02/tuck.html)

------
orborde
Despite ignoring Feynman's advice, Wolfram seems to have done well enough, at
least financially. Whether his sanity has lasted is another question entirely.

------
mike463
I think Feynman gave him _HIGHLY ACCURATE_ advice, but you have to dig deeper
to understand.

Although Wolfram has done quite well for himself, this is beside the point.

You might want to read both sides of the conversation:

<http://elzr.com/posts/wolfram-feynman>

and then read this article:

<http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.06/wolfram_pr.html>

in particular, starting here:

"in the spring of 1992, he became, in his own words, a "recluse."

So, he figured out a way to get away from the administration and concentrate
on the science.

I suspect that Feynman's advice probably helped Wolfram steer a clear course
through all this.

------
kunjaan
I wonder if we will ever get to read such transcripts in this age of private
emails and ephemeral conversations.

~~~
DrSprout
For every person who has gchat set to never document anything, there's another
neurotic packrat like my brother who saves all of his chat history so he can
go back and show people how prior conversations went whenever there's a
disagreement over what was said.

~~~
traskjd
I used to do this. I have a wonderful memory for conversations I've had with
people. I ended up turning off chat logging in every app I used because it
just became a little too destructive to relationships.

Calling somebody out with cold hard facts works better on to-catch-a-predator
than when it's people you enjoy being around :-)

------
pclark
i thought this was in response to Wolfram Alpha.

~~~
chollida1
Feynman was dead for many years before Wolfram Alpha came out. That would have
been some feat to communicate with him then:)

The letter is also dated: October 14, 1985.

~~~
aswanson
I think the grandparent meant for the comment to be taken in jest.

------
mkramlich
brilliant man, and one of my heroes/idols

------
sperry
Who is the Feynman of our time?

~~~
rikthevik
Sorry man, I think he was a one-off from the factory.

------
leej
From YC speech: "I think I had about 15 employees by then."

------
SkyMarshal
Very cool site. <3 HN for these little gems.

------
koeselitz
Richard Feynman is kind of a jerk.

Edit: What I mean is:

How condescending is it to write someone a letter saying that they don't
understand people, and they should try falling in love?

~~~
hugh3
_How condescending is it to write someone a letter saying that they don't
understand people, and they should try falling in love?_

Under ordinary circumstances, pretty condescending. However remember that:

a) Wolfram was a 26-year-old at the start of his career and Feynman was 68
years old and easily one of the most respected scientists in the world.

b) Wolfram wrote to Feynman for advice. To get _any_ response from someone
that many levels above you is doing pretty well.

c) Wolfram started it -- he was the one who talked about ordinary people being
"stupid fools" whom he couldn't tolerate.

