Ehhh, you know, he's not a journalist. He's the founder and CEO of a company that he is very hands on at. What you view as arrogance and self-promotion is really just a man who is obsessed with the technology he builds and works on every single day. No one is forcing you to read his stuff or pay attention to him.
If the only reason Wolfram is writing about Feigenbaum in the first place is because it promotes his product, that makes it seem even more self-serving.
In developing the ideas described in this book I have looked at many thousands of books, papers and websites—and have interacted with hundreds of people (see page xiii). But rather than trying to give a huge list of specific references, I have instead included in these notes historical information tracing key contributions. From the names of concepts and people that I mention, it is straightforward to do web or database searches that give a vastly more complete picture of available references than could possibly fit in a book of manageable size—or than could be created correctly without immense scholarship. Note that while most current works of science tend to refer mainly just to very recent material, this book often refers to material that is centuries or even millennia old—in some ways more in the tradition of fields like philosophy.
I can assure you staff do not write for him. In fact, he's known to get frustrated when people make suggestions on his writing because he's very particular (perhaps even stubborn) about it.
>>you can't build a deployable app with it with anything but a notebook interface. A notebook might be great for a researcher but it's not a good interface for many other kinds of programs.
What I meant is the interface of the built app, not an IDE.
Whenever I bring up Wolfram doc, someone tells me there are thousands of pages. I know that. Have you read any of them? They're not like any programmer doc I've ever seen. Instead of explaining principles and rules, they just give a lot of examples. It's not really helpful and it helps cement my position that Wolfram is more of a library than a language.
He should double-check his contract to see if there's an "anything you do either inside or outside of Wolfram Inc. is automatically our property" clause.
Stephen Wolfram knows about this. He just hasn't taken action yet.
So, he's just been sitting around for several years just waiting to "take action" ... doesn't really make sense. I'd also like to think that Jan Poeschko is smart enough to read a contract.
If the designer of the rpi works for Apple, the rpi is designed to work like an iPhone and apple. Probably owns the rpi ip the best yes its EXACTLY the same.
Watching his livestreams, he seems like a reasonable guy focused on real work designing a programming language and software. Not sure what you're alluding to in 1990, guess it's been disappeared from the web.
