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

The genius of John von Neumann

unherd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–125 of 125 posts

Re: The genius of John von Neumann

#121

Post by goto11 »

esfandia wrote: post #98
beaconstudios wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

trying to get a balanced perspective on people who did a lot for the world is not cancel culture. Winston Churchill saved Britain from the Nazis, but he was also pretty racist. That doesn't reduce the meaning of his positive accomplishments, but it does give his character more dimensionality.

I don't have data to back this up, but it seems to me most people were racist back then and there, but most people didn't save Britain from the Nazis, so from a PCA perspective one dimension is more significant than the other.

Churchill's legacy is more complex that just "he had racist viewpoints, but everybody had that back then." He was an imperialist who believed in Britains right to conquer and rule inferior people around the world. He was bitterly opposed to dismantling the Empire. Even after WWII, he was responsible the the horrifically brutal suppression of the rebellious Mau Mau in Kenya, which included the use of concentration camps. Yes, this happend after the Nürnberg trials.

So while he is rightfully remembered as a hero for opposing the Nazis when few others did, he also did much of the same the Nazis did, just far from Europe and against non-white people.

Re: The genius of John von Neumann

#122

Post by 271828182846 »

Reuzel wrote: post #108
DantesKite wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An intellectual-yet-idiot who placed too much hope and emphasis on game theory, despite the fact that it only works when agents are perfectly rational.

I am not going to correct this statement, just please ask you not to use the word "intellectual-yet-idiot" to describe other people ever again. IYI is a great and new concept, and can be enlightening when correctly applied. Let us (pseudo)intellectuals cherish that value. EDIT: https://nassimtaleb.org/2016/09/intellectual-yet-idiot/ to add something interesting for others.

after reading that article it seems to me that "idiot-yet-intellectual" might be fitting JVN.

Re: The genius of John von Neumann

#123

Post by Reuzel »

271828182846 wrote: post #122
Reuzel wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not going to correct this statement, just please ask you not to use the word "intellectual-yet-idiot" to describe other people ever again. IYI is a great and new concept, and can be enlightening when correctly applied. Let us (pseudo)intellectuals cherish that value. EDIT: https://nassimtaleb.org/2016/09/intellectual-yet-idiot/ to add something interesting for others.

after reading that article it seems to me that "idiot-yet-intellectual" might be fitting JVN.

Yeah, after you reading that article, I totally agree.

It might also be fitting to describe NN Taleb. The only one it does not fit, I think, would be Edward Snowden, the last cultural bastion of free speech and human rights protection.

Re: The genius of John von Neumann

#124

Post by Reuzel »

beerandt wrote: post #117
vishho wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Game Theory eventually settled on Mutually Assured Destruction. MAD can be seen as the tit-for-tat strategy in an iterated PD with multiple level thinking (If we have crazy von Neumann, do they have similar consultants? Do they know that we think Neumann is a lunatic? etc.) and super rationality (we are all players on the same board, damaging other players reduces our own chances to grow, we should be competing again…

Also, for any of this to work, no matter the theory or rationale or lack thereof, the otherside has to believe that you're both capable and willing to execute any given plan. Meaning that floating crazy-but-rationlized war strategies, especially sourced from individuals who are respected and known to be influential, can itself be seen as part of the overall strategy. Regardless of whether said strategies are official…

Exactly. Trump weaponized this principle, making very rash and sudden moves during negotiations. This disadvantaged others, because they had trouble predicting his reaction to their own actions, thus moderating them in his favor or "You're fired!". I think a US general took it upon himself to inform China they would not be attacked, no matter what Trump threatened, because he himself was unable to model Trump's mind. "My task at the time was to de-escalate".

Also why MAD does not work well against information warfare. Is the current polarization of culture and politics a natural outgrowth of American culture, the result of unwitting civilians being targeted by military black and grey propaganda, or an unentangleable combination of the two? Did the opponent push the button? Did we push it back in the 80s and did they notice? Where exactly do we stand and draw the line, allowing countries to defend their (cultural) borders and feel safe, without the constant threat and fallout from offenders, who act like children pushing their parents to see how far they can go.

Sometimes I suspect these larger than life scientists working on the top-secret projects, Turing, Feynman, Shannon, Neumann, Kolmogorov, Tesla, Satoshi, were actually collections of people working undercover, an Alan Smithee catch-all type to launder intelligence, take credit, while keeping it in the shadows. Like the unnamed people supporting Bobby Fisher in his match against Russia. Modern day equivalents would be companies like Google, Dell, IBM, and Microsoft.

The moment the bomb became a button, was the moment the physicists had to step aside, and let the decision theorists step in. The bomb effectively became about how to make winning decisions. Decision science itself weaponized, opponents worrying about the analysts on the other side, not the aviators: you would know they would follow orders, and drop the bomb if instructed. You never fully know what those instructions were going to be, but you wanted to find out. Strategic Cold war espionage and misinformation must have ran wild.

Re: The genius of John von Neumann

#125

Post by hn_throwaway_69 »

bryan0 wrote: post #61
photochemsyn wrote: post #5

You could write another article entitled 'the lunacy of John von Neumann' over his endless pushes for destroying every major city in the Soviet Union with nuclear weapons, too. A brilliant scientist, yes, but also an unhinged lunatic. Not an unusual situation, see Cantor etc. What's curious is how many hagiographies have been written about this individual - some people seem bent on rehabilitating this figure by erasi…

Imagine if every time a story came up about a once-in-a-generation brilliant innovator, the top comments were all about highlighting their flaws and mistakes and minimizing their accomplishments. What a depressing way to live.

Tall poppy syndrome is regrettably quite common here.
Post reply on HN