is the eternal (apparent) dichotomy between pure and applied science, canot be said in advance what is egg and what is chicken between the (quite) uncountables branches of knowledge..
So true. like: after creating thousand of media channels, tv, cable, web, streamed, broadcasted... how can be filled with somethin between ads (billions of ads)? ads are the $$, 'contents' are the fill-the-gap, AI (not intelligent, neiter artificial) is the best response now, infinite recicle of our own intelligence, cheaper, easy, at the touch of a button. Pure noise.
yes, and some changes are not for the best. But for the real big global market of resources, oil, gas, steel, energy, high-tech.. some ideas are still valid imho, of course to be adapted.
And i notice that the lifes of 99.99% of us people has not even a fraction of the freedom of capitals and goods, and this is another side of the problem.
Looking at inflation-adjusted dollars or even fraction-of-GDP, Biden has spent more on stimulus and new investment programs than the entirety of the New Deal. So what gives? Maybe it’s not a capital problem.
Just the beginning is demoralizing. There are many kinds of trust, and quite all are to be gained. True learning require interest and passion, and the teacher has to discover and suggest this in Students. this kind of reasoning seems by the point of view an (educated?)adult, so full of 'intellect', way different from a joung mind (sadly).
I think students, even very young, can feel and understand very well the difference between an iconic autority placed on the highest seat, and someone that can be trust.
Is not a surprise the fact that experiencing this kind of education someone become individualist. Trust is a -consequence-, not the cause.
> If software is about people, not code, who would you expect to manage it better - an engineer whose undergraduate and graduate training was in code, or a business MBA whose training was in people?
Both. The strict separation between tech and humanistic education is the root of (quite) all (modern) evils, and having these two skills in a single person is even better.
Exactly. Technical people building working code that does things that people don't need is just as much a waste as non-technical people knowing what people need but unable to produce code that works. You need both.
So much of the time the foundation is that the software, in its entirety, IS the user interface to the electronics.
It's been that way since the beginning.
Electronics got started much earlier than software and there were physical control panels of various effectiveness too.
Before things deteriorated, it was expected that a UI designer who did not know how to code it their own self, or a coder who was not capable of doing vastly better UI than a non-coder, would not have been suitable for mission-critical situations where living things are expected to interact with electronics.
It all still converges to where you need exactly the same people coding that are designing the UI/UX or it's not going to end up as good as it could be.
"Fortunately" most of the coding and UI out there which are proliferating fastest are not mission-critical.
The root cause for his departure from mathematics was his categorical refusal to let the military-industrial complex invest in his research at Bures-sur-Yvette.
- I know the story. He was a man viscerally opposed to militarism. He once said "he'd rather be shot than wear a uniform." One day a letter arrived at IHES in Bures, where the army's scientific services, called DRET at the time (Direction of Research and Technical Studies), now DGA (Delegation for Armament Applications), offered a grant of four thousand francs (650 euros). When he came across this paper, he flushed red, saying "No way we're accepting a penny from these people!" His colleagues tried to change his mind: "Listen, Alexandre, don't be so rigid. It'll pay for photocopies..."
- And then?
- He said, "It's not difficult, we'll put it to a vote. The IHES scientific council will decide whether or not to accept money from the soldiery. But if you accept this grant, I solemnly warn you: you'll have my resignation in your hands within the minute that follows."
- And what happened?
- They didn't take his threat seriously. The vote took place and the four thousand francs were accepted by a majority of one vote. His face then turned grey, hard as marble. He took a letterhead paper and simply wrote: "I have the honor to tender my resignation" then handed it to the council members and turned on his heel. The next day he didn't show up at his office, nor the day after. Paperwork began to pile up. There were letters from all over the world.
- He was a Fields Medal winner.
- His reputation was such that he attracted the greatest mathematicians on the planet to the Institute. For everyone, he was the beacon of Algebraic Geometry, illuminating the entire planet with all its light. At first, people thought it was depression or a disappearance. At IHES, he occupied an official apartment. After a week, they ended up calling a locksmith to open the door. The apartment was empty. Masses of his papers were found in a trash can. He had thrown everything away, his notes, his books, his reports, his correspondence.
- Incredible! ...
- Wait, weeks and months passed without anyone knowing where he had gone. You can't imagine the panic at the Institute. Scientists started calling from all corners of the world. They had to answer and admit that he had resigned. People wanted to know why he had acted this way, under what circumstances this had happened, where he had gone, what he was doing now. The most unbelievable rumors were circulating. At one point, they thought he had committed suicide, but as some people had met him, they had to face the facts: he was apparently still alive. We have a letter from him dated two years after his resignation from IHES addressed to a company providing organic fertilizers, where he complains that these do not meet the specified standards. It was indeed his signature and, it must be said, his style.
- And since then?
- Since then, nothing. The world's greatest mathematician simply vanished one fine day. He simply let the scientific community know that he wanted nothing more to do with this environment. He announced, through a letter he addressed to one of his former students, his decision to withdraw completely. As people had finally located him in this small village near Carpentras where he had rented a small farm, they hoped to flush him out by offering him a new prize, the Crafoord Foundation prize. This must have been in the early eighties. The amount was around forty million francs.
The background of this particular case is interesting, but the larger point is that what we call "genius" is a matter of priorities. From some angle, every gifted person appears mad.
Fantastic! In this money driven world, he had the courage to stand up for what he believed in. Also, I seriously doubt he was considered crazy, that was the war time propaganda trying to break him down and make an example of him, so that others wouldn't stand up. It's the same thing we see today with the coercion and censorship that plaques social and old school media.
I feel like it was more like his experiences from WW2 formed a very rigid world view about militaries. Arguing for pacificism is difficult as the Ukraine war rages on.
thank you for the great story
reminds me of another great mathematician
harvard Phd in math
youngest ever professor, UC berkeley
decided to leave it all behind and live innawoods like this man
oh and he also mailed bombs to people involved with tech (this man's equivalent to the military)
and he would have gotten away with it too if it weren't for that meddling sister in law! I guess he wanted to have his cake and eat it too.
That's correct! The text is presented on the source web page as a story, and it does not claim to be factual.
Alexander Grothendieck was indeed awarded the Crafoord Prize, which he rejected. (It was never worth 40 mil francs as the translation above claims. The original French put it at "40 briques" = 400,000, currency not specified, which is much closer to the more accurate 800K SEK ~ 800K FFr that he would have received. The fact that the full amount, 1,6M SEK, would be split between him and Pierre Deligne, whom Grothendieck had denounced, might have contributed to his decision.) Grothendieck's rejection letter was remarkably lucid and articulate: https://www.fermentmagazine.org/quest88.
the history of p101 from one of the creators: https://archive.org/details/programma101.
It's a fascinating reading (sorry, Italian language, hire google for help..), directly from the source, about those years when a new world was born, full of big promises and incredible mistakes. Olivetti is still a case study in economy and management.
