flaubere

Stephen F. Blinkhorn, is that you?

Gould wrote a controversial book attacking whole swathes of science done in the past. The existence of a senior lecturer at the University of Hertfordshire who has written a criticism of it doesn't seem that surprising and certainly doesn't seem sufficient evidence that we should disregard what he has to say.

Although von Neumann was certainly a genius who happened to be in the right place at the right time, he's also an example of how groups of people can create a culture seemingly much more important than the effect of one outstanding individual. Lipót Fejér led a school of analysis at Eötvös Loránd University in Budapest. He ran a seminar, was the centre of a large group of young mathematicians who worked together and was enormously influential.

Hungary has a disproportionate number of the world class mathematicians of the 20th century. The numbers are even more extreme when you consider that those mathematicians are all from Budapest, all from Eötvös, and the vast majority of them Fejér's supervisees. It's totally plausible that Fejér created an environment where people who might otherwise have been middling mathematicians, decent engineers, or never have found their niche, were transformed, by collaboration and inspiration, into the likes of von Neumann, Erdős, Pólya.

Even today the Eötvös school of analysis and combinatorics is a significant powerhouse, with most members direct mathematical descendants from Fejér. And there are other branches such as Cambridge combinatorialists where the influence of Fejér's students and grand-students has been key in the formation of world class mathematicians.

I'm sure there are lots of bright people who are coasting at either Stanford or Google. If that's your goal, you might well achieve it. But at the same time, there are people who are going to be vastly more successful than that. The ones who revolutionize whole fields.

Yes, what people competing to get their children into the 0.9% miss is that 1. There are going to be other tests and hurdles in the future which differentiate your child from those with very high natural aptitude. 2. If your child worked 10 times as the top achievers to attain a similar level, at the next stage they will have to work 20 times as hard, then 100 times as hard, until it simply becomes impossible. 3. While they are sacrificing their youth for this, they are missing out on discovering what they are good at and do want to do.

It seems like you are advocating, for a bright but not exceptional child, that they do get pushed to the point where they burn out, just in case they manage to win the lottery of appearing to be in the exceptional group. Even if this dubious plan succeeds, sooner or later it will become clear that they are not as good as their results.

Not sure why you are asking this in this thread, but the implication is that the bullets are fired from ground level, not necessarily horizontally. The maximum distance a projectile can travel when fired from ground level is the basic first result of ballistics.

The author said in a postscript that he was worried about seeming elitist. I didn't think it was elitist at all, and I completely understand why it was a good choice for him to write BASIC code.

However, I also did manual labour in the summer when I was ~20. There was nothing wrong with it. I would certainly recommend a brief stint of it to a young person, especially if you are training towards a sitting down/talking type job.

You are outdoors, you end the day physically tired but with mental and emotional energy for other things. You gain skills and improve your health and fitness. There's usually a good atmosphere among the workers. And you get to point at something concrete and say 'I helped put that up/knock that down/repair that'.

I think he picked a good number. It clearly wasn't $1000 of effort. Jim may not have been interested in hiring someone who, like his previous software guy, was looking to shake him down for as much as possible.

I don't think that Dr Dre gets to evaluate the performance of Apple employees who are women (or Korean, etc) simply because they have a JV making headphones.

I think if you write something which says 'I am biased', the burden of proof is now on you to show hiring managers that it was all a bit, rather than on them to demonstrate that it wasn't.

Absolutely agree. The best and most creative environments I have worked in have been full of people who you could turn to and say "What if we did X?", and they would immediately come up with reasons that X would fail or be impossible. If your idea hadn't been absolutely annihilated after 5 or 10 minutes of this, it was probably pretty decent.

By redefining anyone who has worked very hard and enjoyed success as a 'fierce nerd', you make the term meaningless, and the supposed payoff from being one into a tautology.

I have found a few of his essays very good, indeed expressing things I haven't seen anywhere else. I think he has provided very good advice to young people at times.

The vast majority I would say that he is trying to retcon his huge success and the success of some businesses he has been associated with into a coherent worldview. I believe that in 'Hackers and Painters' he actually goes through some back-of-envelope calculations that show that the money he made when Yahoo bought Viaweb corresponded closely to the real value he had created, in some sense.

It is baffling to me why he isn't able to say "I got lucky - I worked hard and created something very valuable, but I was also in the right place at the right time." Clearly there were special factors at play selling an e-commerce platform to Yahoo in 1998. He's also done intelligent and pro-social things with both his money and his time since then it appears. I don't know what the shame is in saying "I won a lottery - but I have tried to do the right thing with my good fortune."

I think if you asked Jamie Zawinski, who I think was no less technically skilled, nor less purposeful about working on interesting and important things (nor, tbh, any worse at writing thoughtful essays), he would readily admit to having been extremely lucky. I don't know what the difference is between these two personalities. I think I'd rather be jwz in similar circumstances.

That depends on what the alternative is. If it involves clueless people filling up garbage bags with gasoline and storing them in their kitchens perhaps letting the pipeline continue to run would have been safer.