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

71–80 of 125 posts

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#71

Post by bitexploder »

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 am just curious, how much effort went into side channel mitigation, etc? There are a lot of things libsodium does to mitigate side channels that aren't obvious or documented.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#72

Post by bitexploder »

chewyshine wrote: post #48

This was fun and all but it doesn't apply to modern academics. Now, if you 'disregard' you won't get grants and you won't be in academics long enough to make a contribute. Fun but irrelevant today.

I think this is not the spirit it was meant in. It is more self help advice for the struggling researcher. I read it more as, despite your doubt, disregard others in your mind, and do your work. You won't get anywhere if you have convinced yourself you won't get anywhere, so why start/try?

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#75

Post by aptwebapps »

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.

> This applies to scientists, not to software engineers working in a team.

It applies to anyone attempting to do something new, which does exclude most software engineers. Goals and incentives matter, of course, but are secondary here, I think.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#76

Post by wrycoder »

The truly great ideas in physics are actually quite simply stated. They are subsequently mathematically elaborated, to the point where it can be hard to separate out the core idea. Even a Feynman can’t track all the work going on, and elaboration doesn’t win Nobel prizes. Most physicists don’t have the ability to rise above elaboration and application - it takes an Einstein or a Feynman to grasp and extend the core with big ideas, while not being distracted by the fog of elaborative papers.

My favorite is, Wheeler: “Feynman, I know why all electrons are exactly alike!” Feynman: “Why?” Wheeler: “There is only one electron!” [looping through space-time, we see the cross sections]. Ahh....

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#77

Post by jamesrcole »

noir_lord wrote: post #68
jamesrcole wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I wonder, how many people could actually work through things from first principles, if they were taught how? I don't know, but I suspect a lot more than currently can/do. The education system doesn't currently make any attempt to teach these kinds of skills (AFAIK).

I also wonder how much working through stuff like that might actually contribute to making people smart. It would be a valuable thing to find out.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#78

Post by actionscripted »

damontal wrote: post #73

I noticed they linked to wikiwand in that article instead of wikipedia. Do others here use wikiwand? Is it much of an improvement over wikipedia?

I've used it and loved it. For me it greatly enhanced readability as they had put a lot of care into the aesthetic and typography.

I'm not a fan of the way it takes over the default WikiPedia URLs, however. And the Firefox plugin hasn't been updated since 2016 and isn't compatible with newer versions of Firefox so I don't use it on a regular basis anymore.

Re: Feynman’s Breakthrough: Disregard Others

#80

Post by gerbilly »

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.

>This applies to scientists, not to software engineers working in a team.

And that'w why no software engineers working on teams will ever win a nobel prize.

I don't mean to be disingenuous, but did you ever stop to think why team work is so drummed into us?

It's not because teamwork produces better results, it's so corporations can treat us as interchangeable cogs. They want knowledge spread across a whole team to 'de-risk' their projects in case someone leaves.

They know full well that the best work is done by expert individuals, but they choose to promote teamwork anyway.

Post reply on HN