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

Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

writings.stephenwolfram.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 125 posts

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#111

Post by jmcqk6 »

UltraSane wrote: post #107
everyone wrote: post #38

I just learned that Stephen Wolfram himself is a bit of a crank apparently. https://youtu.be/fO9iRDPXvT4?si=CbCjBtOSM5JhgYUF

Wolfram is too smart to be a true crank, but his ego is even bigger than his IQ and he thinks he should rank up there with Newton and Einstein.

yeah he's not a crank, just an asshole. Taking credit for work did by his employees, to the point of suing them. The only significant discovery to come out of his CA work was completed by an employee, who wolfram sued when he published a paper and gave a talk on it.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#112

Post by tessellated »

HSO wrote: post #96
themafia wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fair. What I was trying to get at is that Weinstein is also independently successful albeit in a completely unrelated field. There may be small parts of truth in his critique of the field but GU is just so completely batty and ignorant it's worth discounting his analysis here entirely. I find greater fault in the pushing of his "Intellectual Dark Web" pseudo-cult. So I would agree he's actually a contemptible…

> independently successful albeit in a completely unrelated field what field?

Talking Bullshyt. See: https://anathem.fandom.com/wiki/Bulshytt

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#113

Post by jhbadger »

amelius wrote: post #84
Lucasoato wrote: post #2

I’ve used Mathematica at university, it’s so great! Creating fractals, animations and so on is so easy and intuitive. The problem though is that Wolfram is a walled garden. When you think about integrating it in an enterprise environment, you get hit by such high costs, it stops making sense. Imagine if they open sourced it, I feel like their products have so much utility, buried deep down Wolfram ecosystem and conve…

True but on the other hand it is really impressive how Stephen Wolfram managed to build a viable company around scientific software.

Basically he did it by developing the first version of Mathematica when he was a professor at the University of Illinois. They were not pleased (although they've settled since and Wolfram is still headquartered in Champaign-Urbana near the campus)

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#115

Post by Grosvenor »

Grosvenor wrote: post #21
jjtheblunt wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had it in an engineering inner sanctum of Apple. had used it since it came out in 1988 on campus in Illinois, and folks in Apple definitely knew it. Not sure who all was doing what with it.

Steve Jobs and Stephen Wolfram were friends for years. Mathematica shipped preinstalled on early NeXT systems. SJ recommended some of the UI bits of the notebook. Particularly the separators between cells.

How could I forget this! He also recommended the name.

Wolfram had come up with some normal techie names "computron", "math-o-matic" or whatever. SJ said No those suck, use something simple like Mathematica.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#116

Post by themafia »

HSO wrote: post #96
themafia wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fair. What I was trying to get at is that Weinstein is also independently successful albeit in a completely unrelated field. There may be small parts of truth in his critique of the field but GU is just so completely batty and ignorant it's worth discounting his analysis here entirely. I find greater fault in the pushing of his "Intellectual Dark Web" pseudo-cult. So I would agree he's actually a contemptible…

> independently successful albeit in a completely unrelated field what field?

My understanding is he works in finance.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#117

Post by pjmlp »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #100
kridsdale1 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The situation you’re describing is probably why Python is the defacto language of Machine Learning to this day.

I've noticed an increase in Rust, and I just googled it (for whatever that's worth) it seems to be #2 tied with C++ wont be surprised if it surpasses C++ and eventually gets tied with Python.

CUDA Oxide is only at 0.2, and NVidia has almost two decades to catch up, same with other "Python" frameworks that are basically bindings to C++ frameworks.

Even the Python GPU JITs only started to be invested seriously by the big three last year.

It will take a while.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#119

Post by schoen »

seanhunter wrote: post #79
steve1977 wrote: post #40

I always compare the difference between Mathematica/Wolfram Language and Python to the difference between Classical Latin and English. I don't really like English from a linguistic point of view (as a non-native speaker). It's a hodgepodge of other languages and has so many exceptions, it's not very elegant. But it's so ubiquitous and useful that one basically has to know English today. On the other hand, Latin is be…

It’s a nice analogy but Latin has tons of weird idioms and exceptions. Been a while since I did it, but 1)the locative vs the ablative, and the locative only existing for a few words 2)the irregular verbs such as sum, eo etc, irregular nouns such as deus, aqua etc, and there’s a bunch of irregular like adjectives and stuff that I don’t remember 3)indeclinable nouns that just don’t decline at all and are the same in a…

For (3), the word you're thinking of is "mane" 'in the morning', which looks very much like an ablative but which doesn't have any other forms. There are definitely other words like that, such as "fas" 'right, propriety, justice'.

For (5), these are called pluralia tantum (singular "plurale tantum").

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurale_tantum

I gave some examples of Latin irregularities elsewhere in the thread, and I like your examples too!

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#120

Post by jrflowers »

zamadatix wrote: post #97
jrflowers wrote: post #61

I like the changes they’ve made to the backend in the AI era because now if you input “weight of 1 cup of sugar” into WolframAlpha it says 202 grams and if you put in “weight of 1 cup of sucrose” it says 376 grams. I would rather live in a world where my life is surrounded by mystery than live in a world so small that my mind could comprehend it. - Harry Emerson Fosdick

The AI gave you as right a reasonable answer as could be made for the ambiguity of the questions, try asking why the answers are different when you thought they'd be the same (or check out a pre-AI answer https://www.reddit.com/r/AskScienceDiscussion/comments/2fqyx... )

It’s not a big deal, it’s just the wrong tool for the job. “Sugar” and “table sugar” have different answers, inputting “sugar” and then clicking on “sugar, granulated“ answers 4.2 grams because that action causes it to start mixing up teaspoons and cups, etc. It is nice having all these extra answers, variety is the spice of life
Post reply on HN