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

Terence Tao, at 8 years old (1984) [pdf]

gwern.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 343 posts

Re: Terence Tao, at 8 years old (1984) [pdf]

#101

Post by krzat »

quietthrow wrote: post #21

Genuine curiosity: if you are gifted with a certain “wiring” (genes, brain chemistry etc) why is that considered an accomplishment? Also - We, as a society, tend to celebrate people with “natural didn’t really need to work for” type gifts quite inconsistently - eg A supermodel who is gifted with the gift of looks, beauty etc is also in the same category of “natural” talent but sure doesn’t get the same celebration as…

Do you celebrate people who persevere despite despite their hardships?

Ability to persevere is also wired in.

If you pull this thread to it's conclusion, then nothing is worth celebrating. Just law of physics doing their thing.

Re: Terence Tao, at 8 years old (1984) [pdf]

#103

Post by dfex »

svat wrote: post #15

Don't miss the program he wrote after teaching himself BASIC from a book at age six (Fig 5 / book page 222 / PDF page 10): > 320 print "(brmmmm-brmmmm-putt-putt-vraow-chatter-chatter bye mr. fibonacci!)"

That program listing hit me right in the feels.

I remember when I was 6 or 7 teaching myself Applesoft BASIC and writing programs with funny (to me) little print statements all through them - when computing was just exploding with possibility.

I wouldn't have had a clue what a Fibonacci sequence was though ;)

Re: Terence Tao, at 8 years old (1984) [pdf]

#104

Post by tovlier »

jama211 wrote: post #58
jonahx wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any child who read maths textbooks with enthusiasm for 3-4 hours a day for years could in theory at least get close to doing what he did No, they couldn't. And neither could most adults, for that matter. Innate ability is real.

I simply disagree. Yes, they could. Same with adults. Basically no one does. Also I didn’t say innate ability doesn’t exist. But in my opinion is a small multiplier on top of effort. That’s why I said close to.

[dead]

Re: Terence Tao, at 8 years old (1984) [pdf]

#105

Post by piekvorst »

karmakurtisaani wrote: post #48
chao- wrote: post #8

This brings to mind the childhood of John Stuart Mill: - Learned Greek starting age three. - Was studying Plato at age six. - Studied Latin starting at age eight. And more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill#Biography I guess it helps that he had Jeremy Bentham hanging around his house from an early age.

And imagine what he could have done if he had done something useful at such a young age!

Knowing Greek, Latin, and Plato is very useful for a philosopher of his times. I’m far from being a fan of Mill’s contributions but he aligned himself well with the western history of philosophy.

But if you imply that philosophy as such isn’t useful, it’s simply wrong, if not arrogant. Everyone needs philosophy.

Re: Terence Tao, at 8 years old (1984) [pdf]

#106

Post by keiferski »

aurareturn wrote: post #17

I know it must be obvious but this proves to me that biological intelligence hasn't nearly reached its peak. If we select for pure intelligence, biological brains can get much smarter. Imagine if we had 5 million geniuses as smart or smarter than Tao doing quantum physics. But life doesn't select for pure intelligence, it selects for survival. In the Dune books, they banned computers so they bred super mentally capab…

Sure. But it doesn’t really seem clear to me that selecting for intelligence actually results in a better world. It’s a fallacy to think that intelligence = more rational or immune to human flaws, as a cursory glance at any “intelligent” social group should make obvious.

I think we’d be better off optimizing for conscientiousness or empathy, frankly. Even a world run by gardeners would probably be more beautiful and meaningful than one run by math geniuses.

Re: Terence Tao, at 8 years old (1984) [pdf]

#107

Post by aa-jv »

svat wrote: post #15

Don't miss the program he wrote after teaching himself BASIC from a book at age six (Fig 5 / book page 222 / PDF page 10): > 320 print "(brmmmm-brmmmm-putt-putt-vraow-chatter-chatter bye mr. fibonacci!)"

Found myself counting characters in case there was an easter egg in there. Spoiler: there isn't an easter egg in there.

Re: Terence Tao, at 8 years old (1984) [pdf]

#108

Post by keiferski »

I just read this yesterday in Conversations with Walter Murch, a well-known film editor. Not exactly the same, but I do get the sense that Tao still feels the same way about math:

As I've gone through life, I've found that your chances for happiness are increased if you wind up doing something that is a reflection of what you loved most when you were somewhere between nine and eleven years old.

Interviewer: Yes—something that had and still has the feeling of a hobby, a curiosity.

M: At that age, you know enough of the world to have opinions about things, but you're not old enough yet to be overly in by the crowd or by what other people are doing or what you thinkyou “should” be doing. If what you do later on ties into that reservoir in some way, then you are nurturing some essential part of yourself. It's certainly been true in my case. I'm doing now, at fifty-eight, almost exactly what most excited me when I was eleven.

Re: Terence Tao, at 8 years old (1984) [pdf]

#110

Post by nephihaha »

chao- wrote: post #8

This brings to mind the childhood of John Stuart Mill: - Learned Greek starting age three. - Was studying Plato at age six. - Studied Latin starting at age eight. And more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill#Biography I guess it helps that he had Jeremy Bentham hanging around his house from an early age.

Unusual to study Latin before Greek. It's usually the other way round.
Post reply on HN