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

Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989)

longnow.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989)

#11

Post by jaskerr »

adamio wrote: post #5

"It was amateurs who made the progress" This is a great way to explain why the term irritates me so much. Sometimes knowing nothing is a good thing.

Darwin was an amateur. So was Einstein. And both were subject matter experts. It might help to remember that the root of "amateur" is "amator", lover. An amateur is one who does what they do out of love.

Amateur astronomers still make meaningful contributions, especially in the realm of variable stars.

Amateur archaeologists and paleontologists are often welcome at many digs. Not only are they free labor: they provide watchful eyes and minds.

Re: Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989)

#12

Post by dghughes »

willurd wrote: post #6
adamio wrote: post #5

"It was amateurs who made the progress" This is a great way to explain why the term irritates me so much. Sometimes knowing nothing is a good thing.

An amateur isn't really someone who knows nothing about a particular subject. On the contrary, every amateur by definition knows at least something about their subject matter. An amateur is simply someone who engages that subject in a non-paid capacity, for personal enjoyment or some other reason. Indeed, amateurs can be, and many are, subject matter experts.

Similar to what I was thinking amateur doesn't mean stupid or lazy it just means someone who has little or no experience (yet) but has an interest in the subject.

Re: Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989)

#13

Post by jaskerr »

gnarbarian wrote: post #9
mjcohen wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feynman didn't have to. That was a very good story that was told very well. I now have a low opinion of you.

Feynman would have got my joke. And I disagree about the quality of the story. If it was interesting it wouldn't be on tedx My heart is broken that you think less of me <//3

Your joke was a poor one, one that Feynman would probably have demurred.

The story was decently told, whatever your view of the later TED performance. It gives the reader yet another aspect with which to view Richard Feynman. The reader comes away with more respect for Richard Feynman the man. And a little bit more understanding of Richard Feynman, the genius.

(The Long Now Foundation dates from 1996. Danny Hillis has been involved since the beginning. I believe the Danny Hillis / Richard Feynman / Connection Machine story dates from not long after. Which is long before TED.)

Re: Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989)

#15

Post by Jun8 »

"The charming side of Richard helped people forgive him for his uncharming characteristics. For example, in many ways Richard was a sexist. Whenever it came time for his daily bowl of soup he would look around for the nearest "girl" and ask if she would fetch it to him. It did not matter if she was the cook, an engineer, or the president of the company. I once asked a female engineer who had just been a victim of this if it bothered her. "Yes, it really annoys me," she said. "On the other hand, he is the only one who ever explained quantum mechanics to me as if I could understand it." That was the essence of Richard's charm."

A good counterpoint to the "I don't care if you landed a spacecraft on a comet, you're still a sexist pig" crowd.

Re: Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989)

#16

Post by adamio »

willurd wrote: post #6
adamio wrote: post #5

"It was amateurs who made the progress" This is a great way to explain why the term irritates me so much. Sometimes knowing nothing is a good thing.

An amateur isn't really someone who knows nothing about a particular subject. On the contrary, every amateur by definition knows at least something about their subject matter. An amateur is simply someone who engages that subject in a non-paid capacity, for personal enjoyment or some other reason. Indeed, amateurs can be, and many are, subject matter experts.

I'm referring to the SME term used in business scope. Where a SME is proven through some standardized way, that makes it impossible for someone not so vetted to have input. Amateur being someone who has interest and knowledge but doesn't meet the checklist to have an opinion.

Like http://www.opm.gov/FAQS/QA.aspx?fid=a6da6c2e-e1cb-4841-b72d-...

Re: Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989)

#17

Post by stevenbedrick »

Jun8 wrote: post #15

"The charming side of Richard helped people forgive him for his uncharming characteristics. For example, in many ways Richard was a sexist. Whenever it came time for his daily bowl of soup he would look around for the nearest "girl" and ask if she would fetch it to him. It did not matter if she was the cook, an engineer, or the president of the company. I once asked a female engineer who had just been a victim of thi…

Rather than thinking about it as a "counterpoint," I think it's an excellent illustration of the fact that people are complicated, and are capable of simultaneously being sexist pigs in some ways and progressive and gifted educators in others.

Something that I think really complicates these kinds of discussions is our propensity to think of people in zero-sum and reductionist ways. Examples: "I don't care if you landed a spacecraft on a comet, you're still a sexist pig!", "I don't care what a sexist pig you are, you landed a spacecraft on a comet!".

The one does not somehow "cancel out" or "make up for" the other; both facts ("sexist pig", "landed spacecraft on comet"[1]) can exist and be considered simultaneously. We contain multitudes, etc.- something that the female engineer quoted clearly understood. She made no bones about the fact that she found certain aspects of Feynman's behavior toward her offensive, but was also clear that there were other aspects that she found admirable. This is how socially mature human beings think and talk about one another, IMHO.

1: Or, in the case of Feynman, "had horrifically retrograde and damaging opinions about women's roles in society" and "was ahead of many of his peers in some respects".

Re: Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989)

#19

Post by [deleted] »

stevenbedrick wrote: post #17
Jun8 wrote: post #15

"The charming side of Richard helped people forgive him for his uncharming characteristics. For example, in many ways Richard was a sexist. Whenever it came time for his daily bowl of soup he would look around for the nearest "girl" and ask if she would fetch it to him. It did not matter if she was the cook, an engineer, or the president of the company. I once asked a female engineer who had just been a victim of thi…

Rather than thinking about it as a "counterpoint," I think it's an excellent illustration of the fact that people are complicated, and are capable of simultaneously being sexist pigs in some ways and progressive and gifted educators in others. Something that I think really complicates these kinds of discussions is our propensity to think of people in zero-sum and reductionist ways. Examples: "I don't care if you land…

[deleted]

Re: Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine (1989)

#20

Post by [deleted] »

Jun8 wrote: post #15

"The charming side of Richard helped people forgive him for his uncharming characteristics. For example, in many ways Richard was a sexist. Whenever it came time for his daily bowl of soup he would look around for the nearest "girl" and ask if she would fetch it to him. It did not matter if she was the cook, an engineer, or the president of the company. I once asked a female engineer who had just been a victim of thi…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN