Out of 101 comments, no one mentions that this site is hosting an illegal copy of an artist's work? I mean, sure, the whole book is great... but shouldn't we be having a bit of respect for someone's intellectual property and not linking to it?<p>If Gorgorat.com has permission to print the book, or it's now in public domain, then I'm the first to say link to that pup... but I didn't see anything on the site to say this.<p>I'm a bit surprised that folks who make their living creating intellectual property are so blase about this. There were more comments about the inappropriate affiliate link than the fact that the book is still in press and under copyright.<p>Let's not devolve into "information wants to be free" and "the world is open source", but stick to the fact that the book is not free and open source in the US legal system at this point, AFAIK. Would we be linking to a hosted full copy of PG's excellent book Hackers etc. (<a href="http://www.paulgraham.com/hackpaint.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.paulgraham.com/hackpaint.html</a>) to highlight one of his points? Probably not.
This is one of my favorite quotes from him:<p>"The female mind is capable of understanding analytic geometry... The difficulty may just be that we have never yet discovered a way to communicate with the female mind. If it is done in the right way, you may be able to get something out of it."
– Richard Feynman<p><a href="http://www.phy.ilstu.edu/pte/310content/nature/feynman.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.phy.ilstu.edu/pte/310content/nature/feynman.html</a>
From: <a href="http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0504.html?m=3" rel="nofollow">http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0504.html?m=3</a><p>"The charming side of Richard helped people forgive him for his uncharming characteristics. For example, in many ways Richard was a sexist. Whenever it came time for his daily bowl of soup he would look around for the nearest "girl" and ask if she would fetch it to him. It did not matter if she was the cook, an engineer, or the president of the company. I once asked a female engineer who had just been a victim of this if it bothered her. "Yes, it really annoys me," she said."
I think it works because it takes money out of the equation.<p>There's a line in a song: "I've got dozens of friends and the fun never ends, that is as long as I'm buying". If the man is spending money to get her attention, how can he not feel like "she wouldn't be here if I didn't have money" and how can she not feel on some level like a commodity being purchased? Your real friends are the ones who enjoy your company without you spending money to garner their attention. It seems to me your real lovers will be much the same in that regard.
This seems to have happened in the late 1930s or the early 1940s (he says "while I was working on the bomb".)<p>From what I've heard, the US was very conservative at that time; girls & women in general did not have sex before marriage. And additionally was contraception widely available at that time?<p>The sexual revolution happened in the 60s and 70s. So, this does not make any sense.<p>Can someone enlighten me?
Just out of curiosity: Is Feynman using 'sleep with' as a euphemism for sex? I'm guessing that, this story being written in the 1940s/50s, pre-sexual revolution, that it is more referring to sleeping with a some low level of intimacy.
Interesting and entertaining article.<p>I imagine if the master of ceremonies gave the a physicist the same advice today (say, Brian Cox for example) I picture the guy walking around with a pimp hat etc.
there has been a lot of focus on social dynamics and this type of stuff if it interests you, it's called pick up. for the longest time, mystery and neil strauss were the icons. i'm not sure who it is now, or if they have been replaced. i'd say the whole thing has died down since it got into mainstream television. all of those tricks don't work anymore because the girls know all about it.<p>if you're really looking for a bold opener, google "the apocalypse opener." this will make pitching investors a walk in the park.
I wanted to respond with a rant about how terribly degrading and insulting it is to women to classify them all as bitches, to presume a few dollars worth of drinks, in a just world, entitles one to intercourse.<p>And then I realized the women involved are the sort who would gladly manipulate a guy's emotions and waste his time for a few dollars in drinks.<p>And I realized that justice was probably being served without my intervention.
This is exactly what the fictional John Forbes Nash, Jr did in "A Beautiful Mind". Does anybody here know whether he really did, or if they got it from somewhere else (Feynman, perhaps)?