# The Art of Doing Science and Engineering  ## Metadata - Author: [[Richard W. Hamming and Bret Victor]] - Full Title: The Art of Doing Science and Engineering - Category: #books ## Highlights - I have used the “story” approach, often emphasizing the initial part of the discovery, because I firmly believe in Pasteur’s remark, “Luck favors the prepared mind.” In this way I can illustrate how the individual’s preparation before encountering the problem can often lead to recognition, formulation, and solution. Great results in science and engineering are “bunched” in the same person too often for success to be a matter of random luck. ([Location 147](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=147)) - Tags: [[blue]] - As graduate students working toward a master’s degree, they have the basics well in hand. That leaves me the task of adding “style” to their education, which in practice is usually the difference between an average person and a great one. ([Location 159](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=159)) - Tags: [[blue]] - There is a great deal of mathematics in the early part because almost surely the future of science and engineering will be more mathematical than the past, and also I need to establish the nature of the foundations of our beliefs and their uncertainties. Only then can I show the weaknesses of our current beliefs and indicate future directions to be considered. ([Location 182](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=182)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Vicarious learning from the experiences of others saves making errors yourself, but I regard the study of successes as being basically more important than the study of failures. As I will several times say, there are so many ways of being wrong and so few of being right, studying successes is more efficient, and furthermore when your turn comes you will know how to succeed rather than how to fail! ([Location 211](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=211)) - Tags: [[blue]] - I have already compared mental and physical training and said to a great extent in both you get out of it what you put into it—all the coach can do is suggest styles and criticize a bit now and then. Because of the usual size of these classes, or because you are reading the book, there can be little direct criticism of your thinking by me, and you simply have to do it internally and between yourselves in conversations, and apply the things I say to your own experiences. You might think education should precede training, but the kind of educating I am trying to do must be based on your past experiences and technical knowledge. Hence this inversion of what might seem to be reasonable. In a real sense I am engaged in “meta-education”; the topic of the course is education itself, and hence our discussions must rise above it—“metaeducation,” just as metaphysics was supposed to be “above” physics in Aristotle’s time ([Location 232](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=232)) - Tags: [[blue]] - I make a digression to illustrate what is often called “back-of-the-envelope calculations.” I have frequently observed great scientists and engineers do this much more often than the “run-of-the-mill” people, hence it requires illustration. ([Location 248](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=248)) - Tags: [[blue]] - The reason back-of-the-envelope calculations are widely used by great scientists is clearly revealed—you get a good feeling for the truth or falsity of what was claimed, as well as realize which factors you were inclined not to think about, such as exactly what was meant by the lifetime of a scientist. Having done the calculation you are much more likely to retain the results in your mind. Furthermore, such calculations keep the ability to model situations fresh and ready for more important applications as they arise. Thus I recommend when you hear quantitative remarks such as the above you turn to a quick modeling to see if you believe what is being said, especially when given in the public media like the press and tv. Very often you find what is being said is nonsense; either no definite statement is made which you can model, or, if you can set up the model, then the results of the model do not agree with what was said. ([Location 267](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=267)) - Tags: [[blue]] - One answer is you must concentrate on fundamentals, at least what you think at the time are fundamentals, and also develop the ability to learn new fields of knowledge when they arise so you will not be left behind, as so many good engineers are in the long run. ([Location 291](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=291)) - Tags: [[blue]] - How are you to recognize “fundamentals”? One test is they have lasted a long time. Another test is from the fundamentals all the rest of the field can be derived by using the standard methods in the field. ([Location 299](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=299)) - Tags: [[blue]] - I need to discuss science vs. engineering. Put glibly: In science, if you know what you are doing, you should not be doing it. In engineering, if you do not know what you are doing, you should not be doing it. ([Location 300](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=300)) - Tags: [[blue]] - It is well known the drunken sailor who staggers to the left or right with n independent random steps will, on the average, end up about steps from the origin. But if there is a pretty girl in one direction, then his steps will tend to go in that direction and he will go a distance proportional to n. In a lifetime of many, many independent choices, small and large, a career with a vision will get you a distance proportional to n, while no vision will get you only the distance . In a sense, the main difference between those who go far and those who do not is some people have a vision and the others do not and therefore can only react to the current events as they happen. One of the main tasks of this course is to start you on the path of creating in some detail your vision of your future. ([Location 344](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=344)) - Tags: [[blue]] - have seen the accuracy of the vision matters less than you might suppose, getting anywhere is better than drifting, there are potentially many paths to greatness for you, and just which path you go on, so long as it takes you to greatness, is none of my business. You must, as in the case of forging your personal style, find your vision of your future career, and then follow it as best you can. ([Location 352](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=352)) - Tags: [[blue]] - In forming your plan for your future you need to distinguish three different questions: What is possible? What is likely to happen? What is desirable to have happen? In a sense the first is science—what is possible. The second is engineering—what are the human factors which choose the one future that does happen from the ensemble of all possible futures. The third is ethics, morals, or whatever other word you wish to apply to value judgments. It is important to examine all three questions, and insofar as the second differs from the third, you will probably have an idea of how to alter things to make the more desirable future occur, rather than let the inevitable happen and suffer the consequences. ([Location 359](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=359)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Lastly, in a sense this is a religious course: I am preaching the message that, with apparently only one life to live on this earth, you ought to try to make significant contributions to humanity rather than just get along through life comfortably—that the life of trying to achieve excellence in some area is in itself a worthy goal for your life. It has often been observed the true gain is in the struggle and not in the achievement—a life without a struggle on your part to make yourself excellent is hardly a life worth living. This, it must be observed, is an opinion and not a fact, but it is based on observing many people’s lives and speculating on their total happiness rather than the moment-to-moment pleasures they enjoyed. ([Location 386](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=386)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Society is steadily moving from a material goods society to an information service society. At the time of the American Revolution, say 1780 or so, over 90% of the people were essentially farmers—now farmers are a very small percentage of workers. Similarly, before wwii most workers were in factories—now less than half are there. In 1993, there were more people in government (excluding the military) than there were in manufacturing! What will the situation be in 2020? As a guess I would say less than 25% of the people in the civilian workforce will be handling things; the rest will be handling information in some form or other. In making a movie or a tv program you are making not so much a thing, though of course it does have a material form, as you are organizing information. Information is, of course, stored in a material form, say a book (the essence of a book is information), but information is not a material good to be consumed like food, a house, clothes, an automobile, or an airplane ride for transportation. ([Location 429](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=429)) - Tags: [[blue]] - It has rarely proved practical to produce exactly the same product by machines as we produced by hand. Indeed, one of the major items in the conversion from hand to machine production is the imaginative redesign of an equivalent product. Thus in thinking of mechanizing a large organization, it won’t work if you try to keep things in detail exactly the same, rather there must be a larger give and take if there is to be a significant success. You must get the essentials of the job in mind and then design the mechanization to do that job rather than trying to mechanize the current version—if you want a significant success in the long run. I need to stress this point: mechanization requires you produce an equivalent product, not identically the same one. ([Location 447](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=447)) - Tags: [[blue]] - But you were all taught about the evils of the Middle Age scholasticism—people deciding what would happen by reading in the books of Aristotle (384–322 bc) rather than looking at nature. This was Galileo’s (1564–1642) great point, which started the modern scientific revolution—look at nature, not in books! But what was I saying above? We are now looking more and more in books and less and less at nature! There is clearly a risk we will go too far occasionally—and I expect this will happen frequently in the future. We must not forget, in all the enthusiasm for computer simulations, occasionally we must look at nature as she is. ([Location 468](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=468)) - Tags: [[blue]] - The effects on society are also large. The most obvious illustration is that computers have given top management the power to micromanage their organization, and top management has shown little or no ability to resist using this power. You can regularly read in the papers some big corporation is decentralizing, but when you follow it for several years you see they merely intended to do so, but did not. Among other evils of micromanagement is lower management does not get the chance to make responsible decisions and learn from their mistakes, but rather, because the older people finally retire, then lower management finds itself as top management—without having had many real experiences in management! Furthermore, central planning has been repeatedly shown to give poor results (consider the Russian experiment, for example, or our own bureaucracy). The persons on the spot usually have better knowledge than can those at the top and hence can often (not always) make better decisions if things are not micromanaged. The people at the bottom do not have the larger, global view, but at the top they do not have the local view of all the details, many of which can often be very important, so either extreme gets poor results. Next, an idea which arises in the field, based on the direct experience of the people doing the job, cannot get going in a centrally controlled system since the managers did not think of it themselves. The not invented here (nih) syndrome is one of the major curses of our society, and computers, with their ability to encourage micromanagement, are a significant factor. ([Location 483](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=483)) - Tags: [[blue]] - The Buddha told his disciples, “Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.” I say the same to you—you must assume the responsibility for what you believe. ([Location 527](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=527)) - Tags: [[blue]] - It is evident electrical engineering in the future is going to be, to a large extent, a matter of (1) selecting chips off the shelf or from a catalog, (2) putting the chips together in a suitable manner to get what you want, and (3) writing the corresponding programs. Awareness of the chips and circuit boards which are currently available will be an essential part of engineering, much as the Vacuum Tube Catalog was in the old days. ([Location 571](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=571)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Punched-card computing began because one far-seeing person saw that the federal census, which by law must be done every 10 years, was taking so much time that the next one (1890) would not be done before the following one started unless they turned to machine methods. Hollerith took on the job and constructed the first punched-card machines, and with succeeding censuses he built more powerful machines to keep up with both the increased population and the increased number of questions asked on the census. ([Location 638](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=638)) - Tags: [[blue]] - The federal government, especially through the military, supported most of the early machines, and great credit is due to them for helping start the computer revolution. ([Location 668](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=668)) - Tags: [[blue]] - ibm came in a bit late with 18 (20 if you count secret cryptographic users) ibm 701s. I well recall a group of us, after a session on the ibm 701 at a meeting where they talked about the proposed 18 machines, all believed this would saturate the market for many years! Our error was simply we thought only of the kinds of things we were currently doing, and did not think in the directions of entirely new applications of machines. The best experts at the time were flatly wrong! And not by a small amount either! Nor for the last time! ([Location 671](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=671)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Thus you see the handwriting on the wall for the single-processor machine—we are approaching saturation. Hence the fascination with highly parallel machines. ([Location 715](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=715)) - Tags: [[blue]] - When I first got digital computing really going inside Bell Telephone Laboratories I began by renting computers outside for so many hours the head of the mathematics department figured out for himself it would be cheaper to get me one inside—a deliberate plot on my part to avoid arguing with him, as I thought it useless and would only produce more resistance on his part to digital computers. Once a boss says “no!” it is very hard to get a different decision, so don’t let them say “no!” to a proposal. ([Location 726](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=726)) - Tags: [[blue]] - let me observe in all honesty to the department head, it was remarks by him which made me realize it was not the number of operations done that mattered, it was, as it were, the number of micro-Nobel prizes I computed that mattered. Thus the motto of a book I published in 1961: The purpose of computing is insight, not numbers. ([Location 734](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=734)) - Tags: [[blue]] - we have the machine consisting of: (1) a storage device, (2) a central control, (3) an alu unit, meaning arithmetic and logic unit. There is in the central control a single register, which we will call the Current Address Register (car). It holds the address of where the next instruction is to be found, Figure 3.1. Figure 3.1—Computer structure The cycle of the computer is: Get the address of the next instruction from the car. Go to that address in storage and get that instruction. Decode and obey that instruction. Add 1 to the car address, and start in again. We see the machine does not know where it has been, nor where it is going to go; it has at best only a myopic view of simply repeating the same cycle endlessly. Below this level the individual gates and two-way storage devices do not know any meaning—they simply react to what they are supposed to do. They too have no global knowledge of what is going on, nor any meaning to attach to any bit, whether storage or gating. There are some instructions which, depending on some state of the machine, put the address of their instruction into the car (and 1 is not added in such cases), and then the machine, in starting its cycle, simply finds an address which is not the immediate successor in storage of the previous instruction, but the location inserted into the car. I am reviewing this so you will be clear the machine processes bits of information according other bits, and as far as the machine is concerned there is no meaning to anything which happens—it is we who attach meaning to the bits. The machine is a “machine” in the classical sense; it does what it does and nothing else (unless it malfunctions). There are, of course, real-time interrupts, and other ways new bits get into the machine, but to the machine they are only bits. ([Location 744](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=744)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Internal programming became a reality when storage was reasonably available, and, while it is commonly attributed to von Neumann, he was only a consultant to Mauchly and Eckert and their team. According to Harry Huskey, internal programming was frequently discussed by them before von Neumann began the consulting. The first at all widely available discussion (after Lady Lovelace wrote and published a few programs for the proposed Babbage analytical engine) was the von Neumann Army reports, which were widely circulated but never published in any referred place. ([Location 786](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=786)) - Tags: [[blue]] - The use of fortran, like the earlier symbolic programming, was very slow to be taken up by the professionals. And this is typical of almost all professional groups. Doctors clearly do not follow the advice they give to others, and they also have a high proportion of drug addicts. Lawyers often do not leave decent wills when they die. Almost all professionals are slow to use their own expertise for their own work. The situation is nicely summarized by the old saying, “The shoemaker’s children go without shoes.” Consider how in the future, when you are a great expert, you will avoid this typical error! ([Location 837](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=837)) - Tags: [[blue]] - One way of describing what happened in the history of software is that we were slowly going from absolute to virtual machines. First, we got rid of the actual code instructions, then the actual addresses, then in fortran the necessity of learning a lot of the insides of these complicated machines and how they worked. We were buffering the user from the machine itself. Fairly early at Bell Telephone Laboratories we built some devices to make the tape units virtual, machine independent. When, and only when, you have a totally virtual machine will you have the ability to transfer software from one machine to another without almost endless trouble and errors. ([Location 853](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=853)) - Tags: [[blue]] - fortran was successful far beyond anyone’s expectations because of the psychological fact it was just what its name implied—formula translation of the things one had always done in school; it did not require learning a new set of ways of thinking. Algol, around 1958–1960, was backed by many worldwide computer organizations, including the acm. It was an attempt by the theoreticians to greatly improve fortran. But being logicians, they produced a logical, not a humane, psychological language, and of course, as you know, it failed in the long run. It was, among other things, stated in a Boolean logical form which is not comprehensible to mere mortals (and often not even to the logicians themselves!). Many other logically designed languages which were supposed to replace the pedestrian fortran have come and gone, while fortran (somewhat modified to be sure) remains a widely used language, indicating clearly the power of psychologically designed languages over logically designed languages. ([Location 858](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=858)) - Tags: [[blue]] - History tends to be charitable in this matter. It gives credit for understanding what something means when we first do it. But there is a wise saying, “Almost everyone who opens up a new field does not really understand it the way the followers do.” The evidence for this is, unfortunately, all too good. It has been said in physics no creator of any significant thing ever understood what he had done. I never found Einstein on the special relativity theory as clear as some later commentators. And at least one friend of mine has said, behind my back, “Hamming doesn’t seem to understand error correcting codes!” He is probably right; I do not understand what I invented as clearly as he does. The reason this happens so often is the creators have to fight through so many dark difficulties, and wade through so much misunderstanding and confusion, they cannot see the light as others can, now the door is open and the path made easy. Please remember, the inventor often has a very limited view of what he invented, and some others (you?) can see much more. But also remember this when you are the author of some brilliant new thing; in time the same will probably be true of you. It has been said Newton was the last of the ancients and not the first of the moderns, though he was very significant in making our modern world. ([Location 885](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=885)) - Tags: [[blue]] - An examination of the process shows whatever meaning you want to attach to the instructions must come from the subroutines which are written corresponding to the instruction numbers. Those subroutines define the meaning of the language. In this simple case each instruction had its own meaning independent of any other instruction, but it is clearly easy to make some instructions set switches, flags, or other bits so some later instructions, on consulting them, will be interpreted in one of several different ways. Thus you see how it is you can devise any language you want, provided you can uniquely define it in some definite manner. It goes on top of the machine’s language, making the machine into any other machine you want. Of course, this is exactly what Turing proved with his Universal Turing Machine, but, as noted above, it was not clearly understood until we had done it a number of times. ([Location 919](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=919)) - Tags: [[blue]] - A change of a single letter in apl can completely alter the meaning, hence the language has almost no redundancy. But humans are unreliable and require redundancy; our spoken language tends to be around 60% redundant, while the written language is around 40%. You probably think the written and spoken languages are the same, but you are wrong. To see this difference, try writing dialogue and then read how it sounds. Almost no one can write dialogue so that it sounds right, and when it sounds right it is still not the spoken language. ([Location 937](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=937)) - Tags: [[blue]] - The human animal is not reliable, as I keep insisting, so low redundancy means lots of undetected errors, while high redundancy tends to catch the errors. The spoken language goes over an acoustic channel with all its noise and must be caught on the fly as it is spoken; the written language is printed, and you can pause, backscan, and do other things to uncover the author’s meaning. ([Location 941](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=941)) - Tags: [[blue]] - You read constantly about “engineering the production of software,” both for the efficiency of production and for the reliability of the product. But you do not expect novelists to “engineer the production of novels.” The question arises: “Is programming closer to novel writing than it is to classical engineering?” I suggest yes! Given the problem of getting a man into outer space, both the Russians and the Americans did it pretty much the same way, all things considered, and allowing for some espionage. They were both limited by the same firm laws of physics. But give two novelists the problem of writing on “the greatness and misery of man,” and you will probably get two very different novels (without saying just how to measure this). Give the same complex problem to two modern programmers and you will, I claim, get two rather different programs. Hence my belief that current programming practice is closer to novel writing than it is to engineering. The novelists are bound only by their imaginations, which is somewhat as the programmers are when they are writing software. Both activities have a large creative component, and while you would like to make programming resemble engineering, it will take a lot of time to get there—and maybe you really, in the long run, do not want to do it! Maybe it just sounds good. You will have to think about it many times in the coming years; you might as well start now and discount propaganda you hear, as well as all the wishful thinking which goes on in the area! The software of the utility programs of computers has been done often enough, and is so limited in scope, so it might reasonably be expected to become “engineered,” but the general software preparation is not likely to be under “engineering control” for many, many years. ([Location 979](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=979)) - Tags: [[blue]] - I have faith in only one, which is almost never mentioned—think before you write the program, it might be called. Before you start, think carefully about the whole thing, including what will be your acceptance test that it is right, as well as how later field maintenance will be done. Getting it right the first time is much better than fixing it up later! ([Location 994](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=994)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Many studies have shown programmers differ in productivity, from worst to best, by much more than a factor of ten. From this I long ago concluded the best policy is to pay your good programmers very well but regularly fire the poorer ones—if you can get away with it! One way is, of course, to hire them on contract rather than as regularly employed people, but that is increasingly against the law, which seems to want to guarantee even the worst have some employment. In practice you may actually be better off to pay the worst to stay home and not get in the way of the more capable (and I am serious)! ([Location 1012](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1012)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Another view of neural nets is they represent a fairly general class of stable feedback systems. You pick the kind and amount of feedback you think is appropriate, and then the neural net’s feedback system converges to the desired solution. Again, it avoids a lot of detailed programming since, at least in a simulated neural net on a computer, by once writing out a very general piece of program you then have available a broad class of problems already programmed, and the programmer hardly does more than give a calling sequence. ([Location 1024](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1024)) - Tags: [[blue]] - I made the comparison of writing software with the act of literary writing; both seem to depend fundamentally on clear thinking. Can good programming be taught? If we look at the corresponding teaching of “creative writing” courses we find most students of such courses do not become great writers, and most great writers in the past did not take creative writing courses! Hence it is dubious that great programmers can be trained easily. ([Location 1031](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1031)) - Tags: [[blue]] - On thinking this over very seriously, I came to the conclusion I could not afford to be crippled that way and still become a great scientist; the duty of a scientist is not only to find new things, but to communicate them successfully in at least three forms: Writing papers and books Prepared public talks Impromptu talks Lacking any one of these would be a serious drag on my career. How to learn to give public talks without being so afraid was my problem. The answer was obviously by practice, and while other things might help, practice was a necessary thing to do. ([Location 1044](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1044)) - Tags: [[blue]] - At first I thought I would give a talk on a topic dear to my heart, but I soon realized if I wanted to be invited back I had best give a talk the audience wanted to hear, which is often a very, very different thing. ([Location 1055](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1055)) - Tags: [[blue]] - The talk was successful, since the ibm person who had asked me to give the talk said afterwards how much the audience had liked it. I casually said I had enjoyed it too, and would be glad to come into New York City almost any evening they cared, provided they warned me well in advance, and I would give it again—and they accepted. It was the first of a series of talks which went on for many years, about two or three times a year; I got a lot of practice and learned not to be too scared. You should always feel some excitement when you give a talk, since even the best actors and actresses usually have some stage fright. Your excitement tends to be communicated to the audience, and if you seem to be perfectly relaxed, then the audience also relaxes and may fall asleep! ([Location 1065](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1065)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Note: Sometimes just need to communicate what you want - he offered giving the talk whenever they wanted after being congratulated and they agreed, opening up the opportunity for him to give many more talks - I began, at any lecture I attended anywhere, to pay attention not only to what was said, but to the style in which it was said, and whether it was an effective or a non-effective talk. ([Location 1073](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1073)) - Tags: [[blue]] - This is typical of many situations. It is first necessary to prove beyond any doubt the new thing, device, method, or whatever it is, can cope with heroic tasks before it can get into the system to do the more routine, and, in the long run, more useful tasks. Any innovation is always against such a barrier, so do not get discouraged when you find your new idea is stoutly, and perhaps foolishly, resisted. By realizing the magnitude of the actual task you can then decide if it is worth your efforts to continue, or if you should go do something else you can accomplish and not fritter away your efforts needlessly against the forces of inertia and stupidity. ([Location 1095](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1095)) - Tags: [[blue]] - In such a rapidly changing field as computer software, if the payoff is not in the near future then it is doubtful it will ever pay off. ([Location 1111](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1111)) - Tags: [[blue]] - The engineering computing soon came along, and it rose along much the same shape, but was larger and was added on top of the earlier scientific curve. Then, at least at Bell Telephone Laboratories, I found an even larger military workload, and finally, as we shifted to symbol manipulations in the form of word processing, compiling time for the higher-level languages, and other things, there was a similar increase. Thus while each kind of workload seemed to slowly approach saturation in its turn, the net effect of all of them was to maintain a rather constant growth rate. What will come along to sustain this straight line logarithmic growth curve and prevent the inevitable flattening out of the S-curve of applications? The next big area is, I believe, pattern recognition. ([Location 1122](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1122)) - Tags: [[blue]] - This one experience led us at Bell Telephone Laboratories to start putting small computers into laboratories, at first merely to gather, reduce, and display the data, but soon to drive the experiment. It is often easier to let the machine program the shape of the electrical driving voltages to the experiment, via a standard digital-to-analog converter, than it is to build special circuits to do it. This enormously increased the range of possible experiments, and introduced the practicality of having interactive experiments. Again, we got the machine in under one pretext, but its presence in the long run changed both the problem and what the computer was actually used for. When you successfully use a computer you usually do an equivalent job, not the same old one. Again you see the presence of the computer, in the long run, changed the nature of many of the experiments we did. ([Location 1144](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1144)) - Tags: [[blue]] - One of the main steps happened when someone in the business of making integrated circuits for people noted that instead of making a special chip for each of several customers, he could make a four-bit general-purpose computer and then program it for each special job (intel 4004). He replaced a complex manufacturing job with a programming job, though of course the chip still had to be made, but now it would be a large run of the same four-bit chips. ([Location 1178](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1178)) - Tags: [[blue]] - Before you make this mistake and use a special-purpose chip in any equipment, ask yourself a number of questions. Let me repeat the earlier arguments. Do you want to be alone with your special chip? How big a stockpile of them will you need in inventory? Do you really want to have a single, or a few, suppliers rather than being able to buy them on the open market? Will not the total cost be significantly higher in the long run? ([Location 1190](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1190)) - Tags: [[blue]] - As you go on in your careers you should examine the applications which succeed and those which fail; try to learn how to distinguish between them; try to understand the situations which produce successes and those which almost guarantee failure. Realize, as a general rule, it is not the same job you should do with a machine, but rather an equivalent one, and do it so that future, flexible expansion can be easily added (if you do succeed). And always also remember to give serious thought to the field maintenance as it will actually be done in the field—which is generally not as you wish it would be done! ([Location 1205](https://readwise.io/to_kindle?action=open&asin=B088TMLQDC&location=1205)) - Tags: [[blue]]