
Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989) - ptigas
http://longnow.org/essays/richard-feynman-connection-machine/
======
jhallenworld
Heh, this reminds me of my time at Avici Systems: they made a 3d toroidal
mesh-based "Terabit Switch Router" using wormhole routing with virtual
channels to avoid head of line blocking (Bill Dally was associated with the
company..). The company went public and provided the core routers for AT&T for
a number of years. (Superseded by Cisco's HFR (Huge F*ing Router..).

The questions involved how much can you get away with (before deadlock) if you
don't have enough virtual channels. Also is it ever worth extra buffering
outside of the VCs. Also, how to get more bandwidth if one VC does not provide
enough. The TSR used source routing (a list of turns on the head flit I
think..), so how do you compute the routing list for arbitrarily incomplete
meshes?

It's interesting that Feynman was involved in this field of interconnection
networks, although for actual papers I do find his son's writing on the CM-5.

------
Jun8
"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."

A good counterpoint to the "I don't care if you landed a spacecraft on a
comet, you're still a sexist pig" crowd.

~~~
stevenbedrick
Rather than thinking about it as a "counterpoint," I think it's an excellent
illustration of the fact that people are complicated, and are capable of
simultaneously being sexist pigs in some ways and progressive and gifted
educators in others.

Something that I think really complicates these kinds of discussions is our
propensity to think of people in zero-sum and reductionist ways. Examples: "I
don't care if you landed a spacecraft on a comet, you're still a sexist pig!",
"I don't care what a sexist pig you are, you landed a spacecraft on a comet!".

The one does not somehow "cancel out" or "make up for" the other; both facts
("sexist pig", "landed spacecraft on comet"[1]) can exist and be considered
simultaneously. We contain multitudes, etc.- something that the female
engineer quoted clearly understood. She made no bones about the fact that she
found certain aspects of Feynman's behavior toward her offensive, but was also
clear that there were other aspects that she found admirable. This is how
socially mature human beings think and talk about one another, IMHO.

1: Or, in the case of Feynman, "had horrifically retrograde and damaging
opinions about women's roles in society" and "was ahead of many of his peers
in some respects".

~~~
Retric
I think the contradiction is most _ist people think group X in less capable of
some activity. So, someone that says you’re an intelligent and capable person,
but cultural norms let me dump demeaning task Y on you is not really the same
thing. The closest neutral example I can think of is how the new person in a
group is often dumped on.

------
bootload
"Let me tell you how we did it at Los Alamos." ~
[http://youtube.com/watch?v=0ogSC6JKkrY](http://youtube.com/watch?v=0ogSC6JKkrY)

------
adamio
"It was amateurs who made the progress"

This is a great way to explain why the term <subject matter expert> irritates
me so much. Sometimes knowing nothing is a good thing.

~~~
willurd
An amateur isn't really someone who knows nothing about a particular subject.
On the contrary, every amateur by definition knows at least something about
their subject matter. An amateur is simply someone who engages that subject in
a non-paid capacity, for personal enjoyment or some other reason. Indeed,
amateurs can be, and many are, subject matter experts.

~~~
dghughes
Similar to what I was thinking amateur doesn't mean stupid or lazy it just
means someone who has little or no experience (yet) but has an interest in the
subject.

~~~
willurd
I wouldn't even go this far. An amateur can have tons of experience, and even
be an expert in their field. It's true, many people use the word "amateur" to
mean unskilled, beginner, etc, but in actuality it's simply someone who
engages in some activity for something other than payment. ("Amateur" means
"lover of" in Old French, apparently.)

------
joeevans1000
"One way to do this calculation is to use a discrete four-dimensional lattice
to model a section of space-time. Finding the solution involves adding up the
contributions of all of the possible configurations of certain matrices on the
links of the lattice, or at least some large representative sample."

Did anyone see where I put my sandwich?

------
delucain
That was a really great read.

------
markbnj
Great story. Love the anecdotes of Feyman's contributions to CM-1. I worked
for a few companies in the 128 tech corridor back in the early nineties, and
the whole area still resonates with the echoes of titans.

------
hoprocker
I love reading this well-written anecdote every time it's posted on HN. :-)

------
gnarbarian
It's too bad feynman didn't teach him how to tell a story.

~~~
mjcohen
Feynman didn't have to. That was a very good story that was told very well.

I now have a low opinion of you.

~~~
gnarbarian
Feynman would have got my joke. And I disagree about the quality of the story.
If it was interesting it wouldn't be on tedx

My heart is broken that you think less of me <//3

~~~
jaskerr
Your joke was a poor one, one that Feynman would probably have demurred.

The story was decently told, whatever your view of the later TED performance.
It gives the reader yet another aspect with which to view Richard Feynman. The
reader comes away with more respect for Richard Feynman the man. And a little
bit more understanding of Richard Feynman, the genius.

(The Long Now Foundation dates from 1996. Danny Hillis has been involved since
the beginning. I believe the Danny Hillis / Richard Feynman / Connection
Machine story dates from not long after. Which is long before TED.)

