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

Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

stepsandleaps.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 125 posts

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#61

Post by jacquesm »

acqq wrote: post #53
have_faith wrote: post #3

Does this work for Feynman, because he is a genius? in the same way that lots of successful people offer tidbits of advice that wouldn't apply to someone in different circumstances, or perhaps with a different level of intellect.

Hey, it worked for the current president: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/13/donald-tru... "“In conditions of uncertainty and risk,” the researchers explained, “some instances of optimism lead people to make better decisions by helping avoid more costly mistakes and contribute to survival and flourishing.” Even so, it’s true only to a point. “Excessive optimism,” they concluded, “can become problematic…

Never thought I would see anybody comparing Trump to Feynman, please try to see that the one is a poser and the other one a bona-fide genius.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#62

Post by dhartsfield »

woahhvicky wrote: post #56
loup-vaillant wrote: post #32

Yup. That works. Just don't forget the follow-up, where external feedback is crucial. Shameless plug: I've written my own crypto library¹. Not just for the lulz, I fully intend to use it in production. To do that, I had to disregard the crypto community, that basically says anyone who does that deserves to burn in Crypto Hell the time it takes them to count to 2^256. (I might exaggerate a tad). They say that for a re…

I think the point is that you don’t need approval from anyone to find value in your own work. Who cares if crypto “experts” condone the use of your library? All that matters is that it provides you value in your endeavors. “Showing them” is not necessary for that.

If it's going into production it matters. Bad crypto is only slightly better than no crypto. In some cases it could be worse.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#63

Post by slfnflctd »

ghthor wrote: post #47
bsmithers wrote: post #27

It's interesting that a few people are relating this to team work. I think that is a misinterpretation. By 'others' I would infer something more like 'competitors', though I mean that relatively loosely. Essentially, ignore what other labs are working on and focus on your own (group's) works. My own PhD supervisor had a similar attitude, though it runs against how many others approach a problem I feel. For example, I…

This is also critical for software engineering as well. Large organizations, especially older ones that sort of missed the software revolution will get bogged down in making sure they're software engineers don't recreate an existing project within the company. This thought process ruins creativity and motivation. It's more beneficial to recreate the same thing 4 times over, now you have a team of domain experts 4x th…

> recreate the same thing 4 times over, now you have a team of domain experts 4x the size [...] factor out the shared patterns

This is quite a helpful example. I have spent much of my career concerned about avoiding duplication of effort at all costs, and a significant counterweight just clicked with me.

Comparing parallel experiences for new insights is a core competency of our brains. It's true with many other animals as well.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#64

Post by lovemenot »

baking wrote: post #58
woahhvicky wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point is that you don’t need approval from anyone to find value in your own work. Who cares if crypto “experts” condone the use of your library? All that matters is that it provides you value in your endeavors. “Showing them” is not necessary for that.

I don't think that is the point at all. To that end lies madness.

I suspect you may've misinterpreted your parent.

Showing "them" would be pure social validation and, according to your parent, not recommended. Showing "that" would be sanity protection, just as you understand it.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#65

Post by keeptrying »

This applies to scientists, not to software engineers working in a team. (This can also apply to software company founders and side projects but that's a special case.)

Scientists and researchers are primarily working to build their own brand and to make a contribution which can be tied To them.

A team of s/w emgineers is working to build a cohesive whole. Much different goals and incentives.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#66

Post by acqq »

jacquesm wrote: post #61
acqq wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, it worked for the current president: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/13/donald-tru... "“In conditions of uncertainty and risk,” the researchers explained, “some instances of optimism lead people to make better decisions by helping avoid more costly mistakes and contribute to survival and flourishing.” Even so, it’s true only to a point. “Excessive optimism,” they concluded, “can become problematic…

Never thought I would see anybody comparing Trump to Feynman, please try to see that the one is a poser and the other one a bona-fide genius.

Please note the post to which I respond, specifically:

"Does this work for Feynman, because he is a genius? in the same way that lots of successful people offer tidbits of advice that wouldn't apply to someone in different circumstances, or perhaps with a different level of intellect."

My response post is answering to that part of the question by referring to the article, which is worth reading exactly because it discusses that problem: when and where can it be said that somebody is just delusional, even if he gets to be a president of the only remaining "superpower".

More globally, the attitude described in the article is a broad phenomenon, which is also worth considering. In short, please read the article linked, don't react based only on your initial emotion. I guess you'll understand the post differently. I thought my quotes were a good selection, still I think you really missed the point if you complain that I compare them as equal.

As you see in the article and my quotes, Trump operates under the assumption that he's a "genius." Reading the other news, even when somebody (to be precise, a Secretary of State!) calls him a "moron" he responds with the IQ challenge (sounds like a joke but it's not):

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/10/donald-trump...

The previous article, here again for clarity,

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/13/donald-tru...

is however clear about the eventual problems of being delusional. Much bigger problem for everybody else than for the person himself.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#68

Post by noir_lord »

jamesrcole wrote: post #38
Insanity wrote: post #11

It was a pleasure to read, but of course it should be taken with a grain of salt and not applied to every field :-) Imagine being in a software team and disregarding what others are doing? Screw the rest of the team, I'll work on my own better solution and ignore the parts that are already working well! You might end up with a good solution to the problem, but you'll also manage to piss off a lot of people ^^ A more…

> A more valuable 'quote' from Feynman would be to "Test everything yourself". Don't just take for granted the results of others but verify it yourself. IMO it's more about "don't follow the path others take, where it's easy to make the same assumptions they did. work through things from first principles yourself".

The first principle thing is interesting because I've seen Elon Musk hammer that point in many of his talks.

SpaceX was started because he sat on a plane and worked out the cost to orbit is limited only by fuel costs if you can make things reusable.

It's something I've considered frequently since.

Though I'm nowhere near as smart as Feynman or Musk.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#69

Post by philipov »

keeptrying wrote: post #65

This applies to scientists, not to software engineers working in a team. (This can also apply to software company founders and side projects but that's a special case.) Scientists and researchers are primarily working to build their own brand and to make a contribution which can be tied To them. A team of s/w emgineers is working to build a cohesive whole. Much different goals and incentives.

Scientists are also trying to build a cohesive whole: their research needs to be relevant to the rest of the scientific discussion or people won't bother with it.

Likewise, software engineers have incentives to carve out fiefdoms within their company as a path towards recognition and promotion; building one's own team/department within a company begins with these kinds of contributions.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#70

Post by stephengillie »

Therein lies the best career advice I could possibly dispense: just DO things. Chase after the things that interest you and make you happy. Stop acting like you have a set path, because you don't. No one does. You shouldn't be trying to check off the boxes of life; they aren't real and they were created by other people, not you. There is no explicit path I'm following, and I'm not walking in anyone else's footsteps. I'm making it up as I go. - Charlie Hoehn
Post reply on HN