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

A new biography of John von Neumann

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 132 posts

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#61

Post by rrsmtz »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #52
sillysaurusx wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> whose coziness with the military-industrial complex remains controversial to this day. Why is it controversial? I know nothing of Von Neumann, but it doesn't seem like a bad thing. "Coziness" could mean a lot of things, but personally even if Von Neumann was taking the military industrial complex out on a date every Tuesday, I wouldn't see a problem with it. Is the implication that the military was influencing his…

It’s not controversial during WWII, the pinnacle of human conflict. The war effort was a goal of almost everyone active. The nuclear race was on and many had to flee Europe. Even in normal circumstances, culturally people just didn’t care as much about human life back then. Criticizing that from the comfortable perspective of today or even halfway to the sixties, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Also being smart ap…

> Criticizing that from the comfortable perspective of today... doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

There's a difference between criticism and understanding. We can understand why people felt and acted the way they did in a given time period, but that doesn't mean that we need to sympathize with them or that they are somehow immune from criticism.

Individuals are not just a victim of our circumstances, and morals about the sanctity of human life are far older than the 20th century and appear in times of deep discomfort as well as times of comfort.

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#62

Post by mensetmanusman »

sudosysgen wrote: post #20
yuy910616 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a question of what your definition of "a lot" is. If you use percentage - for example, 1% of parents, of maybe even less - 0.01%, 0.01%*7.7 billion = about a million people. Does percentage make more sense here or absolute number? It depends on your context. I would say in this argument, it seems more certain that Von Neumann's success, which is always a function of both nature and nurture, can probab…

Von Neumann was raised in the absolute best possible environment for intellectual development. It's certainly a meeting of nature and nurture.

No one denies the importance of nurture.

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#63

Post by random3 »

photochemsyn wrote: post #24

John von Neumann was certainly involved in a lot of scientific discoveries, but from the review this looks more like a hagiography with a goal of rehabilitating the reputation of an incredibly gifted scientist/mathematician whose coziness with the military-industrial complex remains controversial to this day. 'John von Neumann, the theorist of mutual assured destruction', is how many still view his record. John von N…

Curious to learn more book recommendations. I enjoyed The Idea Factory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Idea_Factory), A mind at play (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Mind_at_Play)

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#64

Post by CheezeIt »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #57
CheezeIt wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think Lincoln was a lunatic?

I think Lincoln didn't have access to an arsenal that could end humanity if used in the wrong way, so I don't know if the comparison is warranted. In general, if someone is trying to exterminate a population, then I believe that they fall under the lunatic umbrella, and that the umbrella should come down like a Venus fly trap and gobble all of them up. On balance, if we did this to every such person throughout histor…

Lincoln refused to coexist with the Confederates.

I’d put refusing to coexist with Communists on that level, and they actually took over von Neumann’s home country.

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#65

Post by CheezeIt »

chillwaves wrote: post #60
CheezeIt wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think Lincoln was a lunatic?

What makes Lincoln a lunatic? It's not sporting to only present bait as your argument. Just go ahead and outline what you are trying to say.

I don’t think he was one.

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#66

Post by mixmastamyk »

rrsmtz wrote: post #61
mixmastamyk wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not controversial during WWII, the pinnacle of human conflict. The war effort was a goal of almost everyone active. The nuclear race was on and many had to flee Europe. Even in normal circumstances, culturally people just didn’t care as much about human life back then. Criticizing that from the comfortable perspective of today or even halfway to the sixties, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Also being smart ap…

> Criticizing that from the comfortable perspective of today... doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. There's a difference between criticism and understanding. We can understand why people felt and acted the way they did in a given time period, but that doesn't mean that we need to sympathize with them or that they are somehow immune from criticism. Individuals are not just a victim of our circumstances, and morals abou…

Sanctity of life occurred gradually, and is in part a luxury of abundance.

If you want to criticize, imho, criticize someone who actually did wrong. Those who expressed an opinion found to be a bad call almost a century in the future aren’t worth the bother in my opinion.

We were incredibly lucky to have JvN.

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#67

Post by hermitcrab »

gjkood wrote: post #7

One of the most interesting non-fiction books I have read is Richard Rhodes' "The Making of the Atomic Bomb". It talks about how the majority of the brains behind the Manhattan Project came from one school in Budapest, Hungary called the 'Minta School'. John von Neumann being one of those geniuses. [1] The Making of the Atomic Bomb, Richard Rhodes https://www.amazon.com/Making-of-Atomic-Bomb-audiobook/dp/B0...

I heard lots of good things about this book. But I gave up after a few chapters. I just didn't get on with the author's writing style.

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#68

Post by rg111 »

WalterBright wrote: post #56
rg111 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think this way once. But not any more. Some people might do or were something that I won't like. I have learned to not let that influence me in way, and be comfortably ambivalent. I especially felt bad after I came to know that Richard Feynman slept with many of his friends' wives and tried to sleep with even more of them. He burnt a lot of bridges this way. One Physicist had told me that Feynman hit on his…

> Richard Feynman slept with many of his friends' wives and tried to sleep with even more of them. If you're going to indict people for having immoral sex, you'll have to indict probably 90%. If you include trying to have immoral sex, how many would pass your test?

For me personally it's not sex or even immoral sex, it's betraying one's friends.

I know the wives were equally guilty. He seduced but never ever forced to anyone's knowledge.

He often committed these acts of adultery when he was welcomed as a guest at someone's home.

Having adventures on the bed with the wives of the people who invited you in their homes- pretty low to me.

The women were adult and consenting, but it is still betraying the trust of people.

If all these were to happen with the consent of the husbands, although it would be extremely weird and unnatural, not to mention- immoral, by the standard of the stark majority of any society, I wouldn't have given it any thought at all.

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#69

Post by rrsmtz »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #66
rrsmtz wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Criticizing that from the comfortable perspective of today... doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. There's a difference between criticism and understanding. We can understand why people felt and acted the way they did in a given time period, but that doesn't mean that we need to sympathize with them or that they are somehow immune from criticism. Individuals are not just a victim of our circumstances, and morals abou…

Sanctity of life occurred gradually, and is in part a luxury of abundance. If you want to criticize, imho, criticize someone who actually did wrong. Those who expressed an opinion found to be a bad call almost a century in the future aren’t worth the bother in my opinion. We were incredibly lucky to have JvN.

> Sanctity of life occurred gradually, and is in part a luxury of abundance.

"Thou Shalt Not Kill" was not a product of an abundant, decadent society, and I promise you that Neumann had heard of it.

I agree that Neumann gave humanity great scientific and technological gifts that brought us into the modern era, but so did Wernher von Braun. Both also used their gifts to cause suffering and destruction on a massive scale.

We can't just whitewash their history; given their intelligence we must admit that they knew what they were doing and what they were angling for. And it still matters, because very intelligent and clever people in today's world are building weapons and killing machines, and hiding behind the same excuses.

Re: A new biography of John von Neumann

#70

Post by luke0016 »

CheezeIt wrote: post #64
sillysaurusx wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Lincoln didn't have access to an arsenal that could end humanity if used in the wrong way, so I don't know if the comparison is warranted. In general, if someone is trying to exterminate a population, then I believe that they fall under the lunatic umbrella, and that the umbrella should come down like a Venus fly trap and gobble all of them up. On balance, if we did this to every such person throughout histor…

Lincoln refused to coexist with the Confederates. I’d put refusing to coexist with Communists on that level, and they actually took over von Neumann’s home country.

The United States of America is preserved today - intact - specifically because Lincoln valued coexisting with the confederates above almost all else. He made clear even in his first inaugural address that the preservation of the Union was paramount.

There is an incredibly important distinction between fighting against the ignorant temper tantrum of your brothers and sisters and exterminating them all.

Post reply on HN