Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who Was Ramanujan?

backchannel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 130 posts

Re: Who Was Ramanujan?

#61

Post by mfukar »

johnloeber wrote: post #6

Mixed feelings about this article: 1. A fine easy read about Ramanujan and Hardy. It was well-summarized and nicely written, with excellent pictures that I had not seen before. 2. A disgusting vein of self-promotion runs throughout the article. Much has been said about Stephan Wolfram's occasionally self-centered behavior, and many of his writings have a self-aggrandizing tone to them. Thus, I was pleasantly surprise…

It happens to be where he went. I think you're reading too much into a simple factoid.

Re: Who Was Ramanujan?

#62

Post by aws_ls »

lolo_ wrote: post #48
aws_ls wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. I read the article from another source, and came to HN expecting that very criticism. Its so tiresome. They didn't even consider that this article by Wolfram took a rare effort to go into lot of Math of Ramanujan. And the core insight of experimental (Ramanujan style) Math vs formal proof oriented (Hardy style) Math and its parallels i.e. the former approach is definitely enabled by Wolfram Mathematica, is ver…

So it's not ok to point out blatant product placement in an otherwise great article on a historic figure? If somebody wrote a piece on Abraham Lincoln, then interjected the piece several times with discussion about their political research website product, you'd remain silent and think to yourself 'oh God HN, focusing on the wrong thing again' if anybody dared comment on it? And how is it disingenuous? Have you read…

Yes, I read the piece fully. Found it to be quite insightful, compared to other ones, I read earlier. And of course I too noticed the product placement, must add, that I found it to be quite relevant e.g. the link for the no. 1729 . Which adds few more key facts regarding the number.

Also his article point out a lot of interesting things. For example some new photos of Ramanujan, (I didn't know for e.g. he was stout and short, having just seen his passport photo in earlier articles), and some very relevant observations onto his Math and style (experimental & the analogy with Mathematica quite apt I thought).

So overall for such an elaborate article covering so many details in different domains - personal, historical & mathematical. Just to see somebody harp on product placement does seem like a deliberate nit-pick if not disingenuous.

Moreover the guy wrote the original piece on his blog first. And he is fully entitled to his thoughts. And the parallels he draws actually make sense. Just put aside your prior image of him for a minute. To me, honestly, the critique looked to of pattern matching to Wolfram's known stereotype. He is actually making that case. I would rather like to read a critique of why Wolfram is wrong, in making that comparison, than a shallow product placement criticism.

> Personally I find these hipster-ish 'I hate the hate man' type comments disingenuous

Wow. You must love recursion. I like to discuss, but please make specific points. Like I did above.

Re: Who Was Ramanujan?

#63

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

johnloeber wrote: post #6

Mixed feelings about this article: 1. A fine easy read about Ramanujan and Hardy. It was well-summarized and nicely written, with excellent pictures that I had not seen before. 2. A disgusting vein of self-promotion runs throughout the article. Much has been said about Stephan Wolfram's occasionally self-centered behavior, and many of his writings have a self-aggrandizing tone to them. Thus, I was pleasantly surprise…

The great question in artificial intelligence: who will become self-aware first, Wolfram Alpha or Stephen Wolfram?

Re: Who Was Ramanujan?

#65

Post by goldenkey »

johnloeber wrote: post #21
neipfjin239 wrote: post #17

The (sadly all too predictable) comments about Wolfram's self-promotion and product placement give me an idea. Someone should create a blog called "Wolfram minus Wolfram" (in the vein of the excellent "Garfield minus Garfield") which exists solely to republish Wolfram's (often very interesting) writings, minus the references to his own products and his own past achievements. I think it would be popular.

Republishing? I suspect you would immediately find yourself in boiling water with Wolfram's lawyers. See this nice story: http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/

Great review even though I took NKS with a grain of salt and did not get hypnotized by it. I feel like NKS is not pseudo science but lacks much rigor and it written much like a treatise for computational experimental research on entropy and information. So Wolfram still is ok in my book despite his vices

Re: Who Was Ramanujan?

#66

Post by goldenkey »

camperman wrote: post #45
enthdegree wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the best video on the topic I have seen. Many other ones I have seen often revert to using properties that don't work for ill-behaving series, like rearranging terms.

I just discovered this guy's channel the other day - and now I'm completely addicted! Help!

Me too! Ive started learning math. It seems like math is taught as number crunching but is really the philosophy and study of computation and operations on objects. Higher level math seems fundamental to CS and all the other sciences. Im now on my journey to understand the syntax and basic ideas. Wikipedia is great. And this video series is amazing:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CMWFmjlB8v0

Re: Who Was Ramanujan?

#67

Post by lolo_ »

aws_ls wrote: post #62
lolo_ wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's not ok to point out blatant product placement in an otherwise great article on a historic figure? If somebody wrote a piece on Abraham Lincoln, then interjected the piece several times with discussion about their political research website product, you'd remain silent and think to yourself 'oh God HN, focusing on the wrong thing again' if anybody dared comment on it? And how is it disingenuous? Have you read…

Yes, I read the piece fully. Found it to be quite insightful, compared to other ones, I read earlier. And of course I too noticed the product placement, must add, that I found it to be quite relevant e.g. the link for the no. 1729 . Which adds few more key facts regarding the number. Also his article point out a lot of interesting things. For example some new photos of Ramanujan, (I didn't know for e.g. he was stout…

>Wow. You must love recursion. I like to discuss, but please make specific points. Like I did above.

I made points, a number of them, not sure what you're saying here? And how is it recursive? I am responding to you, that's how discussions work.

You were the one to talk about these kind of comments being disingenuous, I was both parodying that and wondering whether you are in fact being so yourself - it seems fashionable to 'go against the grain', I was openly wondering if that's what you were doing.

If you read the article he repeatedly interrupts the story to make comments about his products and how wonderful they are, in fact he talks as if they are the only means of doing mathematics in software available.

I cannot be bothered to pull down all the quotes and make this line-by-line because it's a waste of everybody's time, if you didn't find it jarring/interrupting then I envy you, and fine we can agree to disagree on subjective grounds. I do not at all find them subtle and in line with the article's text, so I disagree entirely with you on that.

I hate the 'he is entitled to' arguments - and? Yes he is entitled, he is entitled to write anything, what does it matter? I and others who read a really interesting piece about a historical figure interjected with what _we_ find to be jarring product placement are entitled to comment on it, and I am also entitled to disagree with you about how incredibly tiresome and 'disingenuous' these comments are.

I don't disagree the article wasn't good, in fact I've said about 3 times now I find it excellent apart from this aspect, so that whole bit about how wonderful it is is totally irrelevant...

To finish (because this discussion is becoming... tiresome), let me correct your straw-manning of me - I actually didn't come in to it with a known image of him as a self-aggrandising bullshitter. I read this with an open mind because I find Ramunjan fascinating, having heard about him 15 years ago when I was hoping I could pursue mathematics as a career (before events out of my control screwed that up.)

I put aside my 'prior image' of him for more than a minute, as I didn't maintain one to start with... be careful of these kind of assumptions, it's probably part of why you find these kind of comments so frustrating!

I didn't care it was Wolfram, but as I read the whole article, I found these things jarring and just sad, since the piece is otherwise excellent and well written. Ah well.

Re: Who Was Ramanujan?

#68

Post by amelius »

camperman wrote: post #45
enthdegree wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the best video on the topic I have seen. Many other ones I have seen often revert to using properties that don't work for ill-behaving series, like rearranging terms.

I just discovered this guy's channel the other day - and now I'm completely addicted! Help!

Fun fact: the Mathologer is also an amazing juggler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zabtIAUKVXY&feature=youtu.be...

Re: Who Was Ramanujan?

#69

Post by aws_ls »

lolo_ wrote: post #67
aws_ls wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I read the piece fully. Found it to be quite insightful, compared to other ones, I read earlier. And of course I too noticed the product placement, must add, that I found it to be quite relevant e.g. the link for the no. 1729 . Which adds few more key facts regarding the number. Also his article point out a lot of interesting things. For example some new photos of Ramanujan, (I didn't know for e.g. he was stout…

>Wow. You must love recursion. I like to discuss, but please make specific points. Like I did above. I made points, a number of them, not sure what you're saying here? And how is it recursive? I am responding to you, that's how discussions work. You were the one to talk about these kind of comments being disingenuous, I was both parodying that and wondering whether you are in fact being so yourself - it seems fashion…

Okay. Some points taken :-) ... I too realize, there is nothing much to argue here, just differ on that article.

Re: Who Was Ramanujan?

#70

Post by tfm »

aws_ls wrote: post #62
lolo_ wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's not ok to point out blatant product placement in an otherwise great article on a historic figure? If somebody wrote a piece on Abraham Lincoln, then interjected the piece several times with discussion about their political research website product, you'd remain silent and think to yourself 'oh God HN, focusing on the wrong thing again' if anybody dared comment on it? And how is it disingenuous? Have you read…

Yes, I read the piece fully. Found it to be quite insightful, compared to other ones, I read earlier. And of course I too noticed the product placement, must add, that I found it to be quite relevant e.g. the link for the no. 1729 . Which adds few more key facts regarding the number. Also his article point out a lot of interesting things. For example some new photos of Ramanujan, (I didn't know for e.g. he was stout…

I saw the link to 1729 and the rest of the links to the Mathematica wormhole and noted (but resisted) the opportunity to go exploring. As it was it they were largely inline. That's some pretty subtle calls-to-action, marketing folks can't be happy with that. Whither the shaded buttons? Whither the popovers?

Wolfram's efforts to relate how Ramanujan's maths differ from the mainstream were certainly worth the price of admission. He spent a lot more time fleshing out several of the other historical figures than his own background; possibly he could have mentioned more people who are currently working in this exploratory mathematics, perhaps that's another post. Maybe we can take this for what it is, and precisely what one has come to expect from Wolfram – nerdy native advertising, in the form of a well-researched long-form essay by a dude with subject-matter expertise. If he starts skipping the inline links we'll know that he's secretly divested shares.

Post reply on HN