I wasn't aware that Danny Hillis was a student of Minsky's and that the Connection Machine mainframe series was created with brain simulation in mind. That's really cool.<p>When thinking about implementing the network topology for a large-scale brain simulation, the network topology should reflect the 3D spatial local-ness of the real brain (to avoid redundant N x N communication between units). One seems to either arrive at a fat-tree CM5 architecture or a 3D lattice of asynchronous processors (but this is not very general-purpose).<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blvC0DA96dI" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blvC0DA96dI</a>
I think there is a cultural disconnect to some of the complaints about Wolfram's post.<p>Wolfram and Minsky both have backgrounds in academia. In academia "self-promotion" is actually not generally frowned upon.<p>People really do expect you to bring up your own work whenever possible and connect it whatever issue is at hand. This is not considered rude or offensive or "bragging", anymore than if someone told you they're from New York City and you mentioned that you'd lived in Brooklyn for seven years.<p>It's a way for people to find common ground and show how much they share intellectually.<p>Thus, I'm pretty sure Minsky wouldn't be offended.<p>And yes, for the record I have found Wolfram to be somewhat self-aggrandizing in the past, but I just don't think this is an example of that, he's simply reminiscing over his history with Minsky and describing some connections between their work.
In an entertaining novel which explains not a few ideas from the 'Society of Mind', Minsky (coauthor Harry Harrison) introduces the idea of "microrobots that could chase mealybugs away". It's called 'The Turing Option' - lots of fun.
really nice thoughts, esp. about teaching and discoveries "marvinminsky said [...] that the best way to teach programming was to start by showing people good code"
Hey everyone: What we can call Wolfram Derangement Syndrome—the vast indignation provoked in internet commenters by his vast self-reference—is off topic. Nothing so predictable can be interesting, and predictable rage reflexes are toxic.<p>The first few times this came up, years ago, it was worth noting. I laughed at the same parodies everyone else did. But by now, Wolfram's odd tic has long been commoditized, and it's our problem if we choose to dwell on it.<p>Wolfram has other things to say as well, and many of them—recently about Ada Lovelace, George Boole, and now Minsky—are interesting. Those are the things HN should be discussing.<p>It's a test for this community: can we stay focused on what's interesting? Or must we lose our shit every time the catnip is wiggled?<p>There are gems in this article that would stimulate a good HN discussion under normal circumstances. Let us put on our anti-troll suits and give that a try.
30 links. 27 links to Wolfram and his products. 2 links to Minsky's work. 1 link to a mathematics geneology site (who was who's grad student). The math geneology site (not Wolfram) is pretty cool. Otherwise this is a particularly distasteful way to put out self-aggrandizing plugs.<p>Edit: that math geneology site that shows all the students of Minsky (and their students, etc) -- <a href="http://www.genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/id.php?id=6869" rel="nofollow">http://www.genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/id.php?id=6869</a><p>Edit2:<p>Book by Minsky Society of the Mind -- <a href="http://aurellem.org/society-of-mind/" rel="nofollow">http://aurellem.org/society-of-mind/</a><p>Paper by Minsky on finite automata --<a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=oL57iECEeEwC&pg=PA117&lpg=PA117&dq=minsky+"%20Some+Universal+Elements+for+Finite+Automata%20"&source=bl&ots=xvG-slRVgZ&sig=ybbdy4Rq2RCKrFWjNbHlOrfkUvY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiensHGksfKAhWLn4MKHQE0CokQ6AEISTAJ%20#v=onepage&q=minsky%20%20%20%22%20Some%20%20%20Universal%20%20%20Elements%20%20%20for%20%20%20Finite%20%20%20Automata%20%22&f=false" rel="nofollow">https://books.google.com/books?id=oL57iECEeEwC&pg=PA117&lpg=...</a>