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

What Problems to Solve (1966)

genius.cat-v.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 65 posts

Re: What Problems to Solve (1966)

#21

Post by jona777than »

cocoa19 wrote: post #8

This echoes what I have thought about my career. What to work on. I've been blessed to have a good paying career in software engineering, but I've never really felt passionate about the products I work on. At the end of the day, my job is a paycheck. I do feel joy solving problems for others, improve society, be able to answer colleagues questions when they "come to my office". My family is happy that I can provide a…

> That may be good enough.

I would argue it is.

I have had discussions with peers recently around doing the big flash-y . An interesting analogy surfaced. The nuts in the studs of the infrastructure of the many structurally sound homes in existence are just as important (meaningful) as the doors, windows, and more flash-y features. They may be _more_ important in some cases. They all make up the home.

It made me realize it might not be all about maximizing ambitious pursuits. Maybe it is more about experiencing the joy of solving the next problem and the fulfillment that comes from simply being needed pretty regularly.

Re: What Problems to Solve (1966)

#24

Post by sky2224 »

Man while Feynman was a genius, I think it's underappreciated just how articulate and philosophical he was. I've always loved reading his work because he just knew how to say things the right way.

This letter really allows that side of him to shine through.

Re: What Problems to Solve (1966)

#25

Post by bbkane »

kunley wrote: post #23
blks wrote: post #22

[flagged]

citation needed

I can't comment on the behavior of his students, but his ex-wife told the FBI that Feynman flew into violent rages and choked her on several occasions ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman#Personal_and_p... ). I've always felt a bit queasy on reading that.

Re: What Problems to Solve (1966)

#27

Post by smath »

alganet wrote: post #12

His words and advice are truly inspiring and I agree with him. However, things have changed a lot. Nowadays we're bombarded with ideas and incredible "opportunities" of stuff we can make. It's almost like ideas are shoved into people's heads. So, I have to add to Mr. Feynman's words an update: _Be sure that the thing you want to solve is really the thing YOU want to solve_ This is specially true for software developm…

I agree. IMO understanding what one really wants to work on, leads to an important line of philosophical questioning to understand 'who am I'. There is a surprising amount of clutter and external influence in our minds.

Re: What Problems to Solve (1966)

#29

Post by rusk »

nashashmi wrote: post #15

> You will get the pleasure of success, and of helping your fellow man, even if it is only to answer a question in the mind of a colleague less able than you. > innumerable problems that you would call humble, but which I enjoyed and felt very good about because I sometimes could partially succeed. > You met me at the peak of my career when I seemed to you to be concerned with problems close to the gods. As problem s…

Original sin mate. We must suffer an appreciation of the divine while being simultaneously unable to fulfill it. Accept you humanity and be kind to yourself about it.

Re: What Problems to Solve (1966)

#30

Post by m463 »

sky2224 wrote: post #24

Man while Feynman was a genius, I think it's underappreciated just how articulate and philosophical he was. I've always loved reading his work because he just knew how to say things the right way. This letter really allows that side of him to shine through.

He could would shrink the complex into something that could fit in even my head.

I like this one:

This particle is a perfect ball bearing that can move at a single speed in one of six directions.

from "Feynman the Explainer" in:

https://longnow.org/essays/richard-feynman-connection-machin...

also:

"Don't say `reflected acoustic wave.' Say [echo]." Or, "Forget all that `local minima' stuff. Just say there's a bubble caught in the crystal and you have to shake it out." Nothing made him angrier than making something simple sound complicated.

Post reply on HN